Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Council meeting 2015-04-14: call for agenda items

["Anthony G. Basile" <blueness@gentoo.org>]

On 04/07/15 11:38, Michael Palimaka wrote:
> On 07/04/15 08:22, Matt Turner wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> For instance, in this topic I haven't seen any comment from
>>> alpha/ia64/sparc arch teams...
>> I haven't commented because I don't honestly believe people care.
>>
>> I'm really disappointed that the discussion is entirely about creating
>> keyword-dropping policies and no one is asking whether there are
>> things we can do to make keyword/stable requests a more streamlined
>> process. But, that kind of thing seems to be par for the course on
>> this list.
> We've heard very little from arch teams at all, let alone proposals for
> improving the stabilisation process. That's the main reason this sort of
> topic keeps coming up.
>
>

I don't want my silence to be misinterpreted regarding ppc and ppc64.  
For those arches, I'm willing to trim back on stabilization, but I 
really don't want to drop to ~ as we did for mips.  In fact, I'm 
thinking of turning mips itself back into a stable arches with just the 
@system packages being candidates for stabilization.  The reason I like 
this approach is when I build stage3's I can control what I know will 
build (stable packages) vs the latest packages added to the tree 
(~arch).  Nothing is more painful than have to manually intervene in a 
bunch of catalyst builds.  Being able to control what will be built via 
stable keywords saves time and effort.

-- 
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail    : blueness@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP  : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB  DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA
GnuPG ID  : F52D4BBA