* Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy
@ 2014-01-15 8:03 99% ` Dirkjan Ochtman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Dirkjan Ochtman @ 2014-01-15 8:03 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Gentoo Development
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 5:49 AM, William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Also, there is a substantial number of packages which contain only python
>> code (or perl, ruby), or only LaTeX classes, or only documentation. It
>> makes no sense to test them on each arch separately. I think maintainers
>> should be allowed to stabilize such packages (with no compiled code) on
>> all arches.
>
> There is a reason we don't do this, back in Gentoo history somewhere, but I
> don't remember what it was.
>
> If someone can tell us why this isn't allowed I am all ears. Otherwise,
> I could agree on this point as well.
Yeah, as the python team lead, I feel we could definitely stick some
policy bits in (almost) all python packages that says stable for one
arch means stable for all arches. Sure, there'd be some fallout, but I
suspect that would be very limited, and in return only one arch tester
(or the maintainer!) can stabilize for all architectures.
Cheers,
Dirkjan
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2014-01-14 21:37 [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy William Hubbs
2014-01-15 3:48 ` grozin
2014-01-15 4:49 ` William Hubbs
2014-01-15 8:03 99% ` Dirkjan Ochtman
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox