public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "\"Paweł Hajdan, Jr.\"" <phajdan.jr@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] making the stable tree more up-to-date
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:27:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EEB4742.5000302@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4EEB2087.2050608@gentoo.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2155 bytes --]

On 12/16/11 11:42 AM, justin wrote:
> I really like that you open all those bugs. But it makes no sense to
>  add arches after a "time out". At least not after a such a short 
> one.

I'm sorry this has annoyed/upset you. Let me just point out some facts:

- in November I first wrote about this new "more stabilizations" thing,
and included a list of ~800 packages, including many sci- ones
(<http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_a8d47428737e600238e3ad3d60f79208.xml>).
I don't remember any complains from the sci- maintainers then.

- people complain that a week-long timeout is too short, while after I
CC arches the answer often comes within minutes.

- actually in this case you've said "go ahead" for the bugs filed (thank
you!), so I don't fully understand the concerns here

- the bugs get filed when a package's most recent version has spent 6
months in ~arch, has _no_ open bugs, and is not a beta/alpha/rc/whatever
version. Many packages for which I filed bugs spent in ~arch a year or more.

> The maintainer is responsible for the package, that means it is
> their responsibility to decide that a package should go stable.

Packages with stable versions a year behind suggest this is not always
the case. Furthermore, most maintainers are happy about those
stabilizations (or tools), and users also like it.

> In addition they have to make the package fit to the standards that 
> the arch teams request.

There are standards and nits. We frequently stabilize a package if only
nits are present.

> So as long as you don't review the packages yourself, consider a
> different proceeding than this timeout.

See the conditions above that packages have to meet to be included in
the stabilization list. I consider that an adequate review, and I know
arch developers and testers who look at the ebuilds.

It's always possible to close the bug if the package is deemed not ready.

> Please remove all added arches from the packages maintained by all 
> sci* teams.

I can do that, but are you sure? I noted you've commented "go ahead"
on many of those (thank you!) - how about those bugs?


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 203 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-12-16 13:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-11-21  8:41 [gentoo-dev] making the stable tree more up-to-date "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2011-11-21 11:48 ` Ulrich Mueller
2011-11-21 12:14 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2011-11-21 12:24   ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2011-11-21 12:27   ` Rich Freeman
2011-11-21 13:12 ` James Broadhead
2011-11-21 15:47 ` Brian Dolbec
2011-11-23 14:27 ` [gentoo-dev] " Torsten Veller
2011-11-24 15:17   ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2011-11-24 16:35     ` Ian Stakenvicius
2011-11-24 17:12       ` Rich Freeman
2011-11-24 17:26         ` Pacho Ramos
2011-11-29 12:18         ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2011-11-25 16:39 ` [gentoo-dev] " Thomas Kahle
2011-11-25 19:06   ` Mr. Aaron W. Swenson
2011-11-29 12:17   ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2011-12-16 10:42 ` justin
2011-12-16 11:06   ` Agostino Sarubbo
2011-12-16 11:10     ` Anthony G. Basile
2011-12-16 11:21       ` Agostino Sarubbo
2011-12-16 11:46         ` justin
2011-12-18 10:59           ` [gentoo-dev] checking C*FLAGS used for build (was: making the stable tree more up-to-date) Michał Górny
2011-12-16 11:07   ` [gentoo-dev] making the stable tree more up-to-date Brian Harring
2011-12-16 13:27   ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." [this message]
2011-12-16 13:53     ` Rich Freeman
2011-12-16 14:05       ` Andreas K. Huettel
2011-12-16 18:40         ` Tim Harder
2011-12-16 14:12     ` justin
2011-12-17 15:25       ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4EEB4742.5000302@gentoo.org \
    --to=phajdan.jr@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox