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 5F779138247 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 05:08:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0D44DE0998; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 05:08:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB13FE08EA for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 05:08:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from grubbs.orbis-terrarum.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CA8633F7E1 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 05:08:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 4398 invoked by uid 10000); 15 Jan 2014 05:07:58 -0000 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 05:07:58 +0000 From: "Robin H. Johnson" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy Message-ID: References: <20140114213719.GA2684@laptop.home> <20140115044948.GA4345@laptop.home> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140115044948.GA4345@laptop.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 04f8a66a-35b2-4822-b87c-09bfc14f9531 X-Archives-Hash: 6ceee704203032ed3440ea21d9c4bb50 On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:49:48PM -0600, William Hubbs 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. I vaguely recall an example of some non-compiled Perl code that wasn't portable over architectures. However I feel that should really be the exception, not the general case. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robbat2@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85