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 657F8138A1F for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 19:21:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7CB2DE0E38; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 19:21:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-f177.google.com (mail-qc0-f177.google.com [209.85.216.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97412E0E07 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 19:21:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id i8so1217424qcq.8 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 11:21:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Xu7G4nxwS0wNmPcqBnUA4T5Kbk6ut7KI3z27Yl04Zbs=; b=ofGmuC+2/dLi/tzZo8JPHMYjvZSmE33bh6UkzAcenDmm06mHfEEpe28LkNSUoSlbZw t23Yd8xXQv6FY+RsXo0Vd4i23BP/cj+V2xBrXM9vCsOyCRhfYhREpERxBJZJRHBtk4/h OYUVgghE4HBxCKVdasegqwzKWTZK3tTTi2DqNdFajgRM4DZ7OkgG7+IzD5E4sM7fVuMU qCX5IVfgvTcMXaFm9Rp8iXEw9zrIXhpobB/vXfG/EYt4QMvShxE6oKDRayD5HWnrxXP7 pC+u4MxGF5oXEBHNJK0L3qEfrgBhwwVE33JpC7kuNSLxw3hJFLStONqa6hheslxKrth0 +Abw== 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 X-Received: by 10.140.40.5 with SMTP id w5mr5011160qgw.65.1390936903037; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 11:21:43 -0800 (PST) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.49.233 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 11:21:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20140128182304.7d458a17@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> References: <52E7DBC1.5020102@gentoo.org> <20140128182304.7d458a17@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:21:42 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: cgVvv1ymJv2OYoAqjEd7VJuLQaA Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] dropping redundant stable keywords From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: a4dd432a-18ba-4e31-9d42-dc1ed68bd87a X-Archives-Hash: cc9fa243419101dab9819954acb147b0 On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 08:33:05 -0800 > ""Pawe=C5=82 Hajdan, Jr."" wrote: > >> Why not allow maintainers to drop redundant stable and even ~arch >> keywords from their packages? > > This is standard practice already. If there is still pain then maybe we need to re-communicate this, or clarif= y. To me if a package is in the tree and is outdated, but kept for only the benefit of a few lagging archs, then maintainers can close bugs as WONTFIX if they don't pertain to newer versions. If that is the case then there is no cost to keeping the old packages around. The main concern is around maintenance burden. The only way to reduce maintenance burden is to do less maintenance (I haven't heard any suggestions that will somehow make bugs go away). If maintainers are doing more maintenance than they are required to do, then simply reinforcing existing policy could solve the problem. We just need to align around expectations. Rich