public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
Search results ordered by [date|relevance]  view[summary|nested|Atom feed]
thread overview below | download: 
* Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy
  @ 2014-01-15 15:30 99%   ` William Hubbs
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: William Hubbs @ 2014-01-15 15:30 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1513 bytes --]

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 03:30:39PM +0400, Sergey Popov wrote:
> 15.01.2014 01:37, William Hubbs пишет:
> > All,
> > 
> > It is becoming more and more obvious that we do not have enough manpower
> > on the arch teams, even some of the ones we consider major arch's, to
> > keep up with stabilization requests. For example, there is this bug [1],
> > which is blocking the stabilization of several important packages.
> 
> And by the way, the only arches left there are ppc and ppc64, which are
> NOT major ones.

Sparc is also still on that bug, and according to the council decision I
sited, these arch's are still treated like major arch's.

Wrt your comment about x86 and amd64 having agreements that maintainers
can stabilize packages on those arch's, I thought amd64 did, but I
didn't know about x86.

Formal policy says that all stabilizations must be done by arch teams
unless you have special arrangements with them [1], so my questions
still stand.

1. Should we make it policy that maintainers can stabilize packages on
arch's they have access to?

2. See Rich's message in this thread for my other concern; he spells it
out pretty well -- what should we do about architectures the maintainer
does not have access to?

3. Also, another interesting question has come up in this thread, that of
non-binary packages. Should we give maintainers the option of
stabilizing them on all arch's themselves?

William

[1] http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

^ 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 11:30     ` Sergey Popov
2014-01-15 15:30 99%   ` William Hubbs

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox