Re: [gentoo-dev] Ebuild bumping policy wrt KEYWORDS

[Jason Wever <weeve@gentoo.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Chris Gianelloni wrote:

> On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 01:20, Jason Wever wrote:
>> Personally, I would rather run into a package breaking in a revbump than
>> have it be missing keywords and not notified that it was behind. While yes
>> this stinks from a QA perspective, it also gets the problem addressed and
>> resolved quicker (usually) than running into it later on down the road.
>> It's also a lot easier wrt the overhead the package maintainers, arch
>> maintainers and infrastructure maintainers have to go through to
>> accomidate extra emails, bugs, etc if test requests had to be issued each
>> time a package got rev or version bumped in the portage tree.
>
> So for Sparc, I should just KEYWORD away (on non-critical packages) and
> hope nothing breaks?

Sorry, this was meant only for causes where previous revisions of a given 
package had sparc or ~sparc keywords and the package maintainer is 
uncertain of whether to keep them or not going forward.

- -- 
Jason Wever
Gentoo/Sparc Co-Team Lead
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBLgJPdKvgdVioq28RAkQRAKCkiOgXHAyoScGVhFJbt0FpHclAfwCgmy3b
Zj4qAnPlhHi8MMhjeKAcVBA=
=2Ol2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list