From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2074B139694 for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 11:45:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 50E81E0DFF; Mon, 8 May 2017 11:45:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mo6-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de (mo6-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de [IPv6:2a01:238:20a:202:5305::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00095E0DFE for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 11:45:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1494243955; l=1580; s=domk; d=akhuettel.de; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version:References: In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:To:From; bh=nzHEIzghXp4xLvzDYW62UVr5qOczhJzocPVIjeBvRIg=; b=gnpwcCO4v0IwtUMeLcTo5b6e9izCkDsoXyfp2pH4PkgVX5OZrBF7HJK485DOu7k+bX 3q9eMRRlSTIA8k5li5nbg6JoBy9zkauNbcQMOPUx4nTFNx0VWuu7rwuWvJGS11wEujXh 3i/kZRErMUGIdaTq5CDPCCe53ySO6MLGvXDNY= X-RZG-AUTH: :IW0NeWCpcPchHrcnS4ebzBgQnKHTmUiSF2JlOcyy/p6KPKBAvzyb6Cax/A== X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo05 Received: from porto.localnet (tmo-096-209.customers.d1-online.com [80.187.96.209]) by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 40.6 DYNA|AUTH) with ESMTPSA id 30b77dt48BjrVMK (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (curve secp521r1 with 521 ECDH bits, eq. 15360 bits RSA)) (Client did not present a certificate) for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 13:45:53 +0200 (CEST) From: "Andreas K. Huettel" To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] arches.desc & GLEP 72 (was: Re: [gentoo-project] Items for Council Agenda, May 14) Date: Mon, 08 May 2017 13:46:00 +0200 Message-ID: <3588979.Z3kVisoUaO@porto> Organization: Gentoo Linux In-Reply-To: <1494189051.1963.6.camel@gentoo.org> References: <0ac908a7-9875-f629-fa0c-0c85945e1185@gentoo.org> <2792793.3ddXxQ3v2e@pinacolada> <1494189051.1963.6.camel@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: c06ffdc1-d800-4577-9657-6501d4956e16 X-Archives-Hash: 3b815c4fbd752486c31598e526c6b9ea Am Sonntag, 7. Mai 2017, 22:30:51 CEST schrieb Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny: >=20 > Oh, one more thing that I've forgot to mention in the original mail. > It'd probably be useful to solve two disjoint problems: >=20 > a. whether CI should enforce correct depgraph and how, >=20 Well, my approach for this would be that CI should enforce the same things = as=20 Repoman. Which means * stable: CI enforces separate deptrees for arch and ~arch * (testing, now) mixed: CI enforces deptree for ~arch (treating arch as ~ar= ch) * unstable: CI enforces deptree for ~arch, CI errors on encountering arch >=20 > 2. stable depgraph is broken and we don't care (i.e. we don't CC > the arch and drop old stable versions if necessary). Keep the arch on "mixed", or drop all stable keywords in one commit and the= n=20 set it to "unstable". > > b. whether we should request stabilizing packages. >=20 >=20 > 1. stable depgraph is broken but we want to fix it (i.e. should CC > the arch on stablereqs), Well... so far my approach would have been,=20 * keep arch (testing) mixed, until the arch team says "good to go",=20 * then make hard switch to stable, and start with stablerequests We could, however, add one more column *only* for the (testing) mixed case,= =20 which states whether stabilization requests are required. (Only for the mixed case, since for "stable" this is always yes, and for=20 "unstable" it makes no sense.) =2D-=20 Andreas K. H=C3=BCttel dilfridge@gentoo.org Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)