From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Rbw81-0005Ma-Nm for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 15:24:49 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4BDD121C1EF; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 15:24:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B913721C1DE for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 15:22:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from phjr-macbookpro.local (fi122.internetdsl.tpnet.pl [80.53.34.122]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: phajdan.jr) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 97DC91B4023 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 15:22:36 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4EECB3A1.6010006@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 16:22:09 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?IlBhd2XFgiBIYWpkYW4sIEpyLiI=?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-dev] mass stabilization and non-x86-non-amd64 arches X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.3 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig1B64E97C49CE62B5511E458F" X-Archives-Salt: d8fec062-37f6-472a-bcc3-1cabc49df3cf X-Archives-Hash: 282d7372fa281127284eaf6d338206e3 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig1B64E97C49CE62B5511E458F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For several mass-filed stabilization bugs I got comments why I didn't cc arches like ppc. One problem is that I cc x86 and amd64 via "edit many bugs at once" Bugzilla feature, and when filing bugs the script checks that it's repoman-possible to stabilize given package on x86 and amd64. Not all packages are even keyworded ~ppc, and I guess there are packages that can be stabilized on x86 and amd64, but not ppc because of ~ppc dependencies. All of that is of course solvable with a smarter script, however I'm really worried about the additional load on the "rare arches". I frequently notice they drop stable keywords when asked for a stabilization of some rare package (and I'm fine with that), and they may be annoyed by stabilization requests for minor and revision bumps (which are fine at least for x86, because of the batch-stabilization workflow; of course other arches are welcome to adopt it too). What do you think? Should I make my scripts smarter, or is it fine to just cc x86 and amd64? Is anyone from non-x86-non-amd64 arch teams annoyed by the queue of stabilization bugs? --------------enig1B64E97C49CE62B5511E458F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAk7ss6wACgkQuUQtlDBCeQLorQCfc4zxJNx40Undf2Cp0Z3SCzmA PcMAn07N0PbH50M4h84dGA3C2Tw4UYgY =By6X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig1B64E97C49CE62B5511E458F--