Re: [gentoo-dev] Documenting touching of arch profiles' files

[Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org>]

On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 2 November 2012 18:01, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> [...]
>>> With the exception of hppa which explicitly says its use.mask shouldn't
>>> be touched without permission, and now I can't enable pypy on flaggie
>>> because that arch is slacking. Great, isn't it?
>>
>> As Michael already said on the very first post on this thread, you are
>> free to touch the file is arch is slacking.
>
> In that case this whole policy is unnecessary, as the minor arches are
> always slacking and unresponsive, while x86 and amd64 have no problems
> with developers doing what they need to do in their profiles.
>
> In my opinion we should simply state that:
> 1) contacting arch teams is preferred, but should not hold up
> development activity if they are not immediately responsive
> 2) we need make sure a bug is filed for each issue, so arch teams are
> kept in the loop, and everyone can track what is going on
> 3) small changes are no problem (e.g. package.use.mask), but
> wider-reaching changes should be announced / discussed in advance
>

which are the minor arches? And how do you classify arches on major and minor?

I already said that if an arch is not responsive go ahead and commit
your changes.

Discussing it in a public ML everytime you want to touch the use.mask
of an arch is not efficient. A bug may be preferred yes.
Like I said, we already touch package.use.mask without previously
getting an ACK from the arch so the policy for this
situation will not change.

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2