From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1CAF1381F3 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 04:03:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 464B9E09DF; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 04:03:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E8A1E08BD for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 04:03:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from phjr-macbookpro.local (adsl-75-36-170-224.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net [75.36.170.224]) (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 7DFE233EE82 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 04:03:32 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <524E3E10.90102@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 21:03:28 -0700 From: =?UTF-8?B?IlBhd2XFgiBIYWpkYW4sIEpyLiI=?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 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: Re: [gentoo-dev] stabilizing libraries without testing reverse deps References: <52489E6F.5080807@gentoo.org> <524926B2.1070108@gentoo.org> <5249561F.8050108@gentoo.org> <52496465.1000001@gentoo.org> <5249677C.9050702@gentoo.org> <20131001195157.31947.qmail@stuge.se> <524D9735.5040409@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rIOKo2QgpHd1DsFPn0akiFoN7aWuQvqtG" X-Archives-Salt: 0fc69bde-d1c1-474a-af78-005835c9b8da X-Archives-Hash: eee04943970a5c5d7b75ac2202b8778e This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --rIOKo2QgpHd1DsFPn0akiFoN7aWuQvqtG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 10/3/13 3:30 PM, Kent Fredric wrote: > Now, if you were to see "no people have successfully built combination = X", > that in itself is interesting, even if you don't have actual failure > reports of that combination. >=20 > Also, if "5 testers tested this combination and nothing bad happened" i= s > combined with "however, we have 200 similar installation failures repor= ted > for this combination", you've got some context for research you need to= do > to understand why those failures exist ( even if none of them managed t= o > file a bug report ). >=20 > Essentially, I'm saying we need to lower the thresholds to providing > reliable feedback about what is happening with packages in the field, i= e: > Diego's smoke boxes are very very useful, but thats *one* person. Imagi= ne > if we can get 500+ people running similar smoke operations with a > manageable feedback system. Oh totally, I was not dismissing benefits of that. It'd be great. There is only one small detail: someone would need to create it. Then, based on how other stats-related efforts in Gentoo turned out, it's not that obvious to me how big the coverage would actually be. When I think about using Gentoo in any production environment, I'm pretty sure one has to do his own testing and staging. We try to keep things reasonably sane in Gentoo stable, but even what you're describing above won't cover _everything_, and this is mostly what I'm saying. Pawe=C5=82 --rIOKo2QgpHd1DsFPn0akiFoN7aWuQvqtG 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) iEYEARECAAYFAlJOPhQACgkQuUQtlDBCeQKAqACfeFA6WQulsE6aUJicQgp6J+Yw c5UAn2hW3UZB4hcsRVvMEAsfaorxDX3L =61iU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rIOKo2QgpHd1DsFPn0akiFoN7aWuQvqtG--