On 08/05/2016 02:45 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 08/05/2016 08:42 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >>>>>> Ultimately, I think we need some form of automated stabilization, e.g. >>>>>> if a package version sits in ~ for 30 days and there are no blockers at >>>>>> that point, the new version should go automatically to stable on all >>>>>> architectures where there is a previous stable version. >>>> >>>> I LOUDLY disagree. The stable tree should not be compromised by such >>>> automation, it is already bad enough without proper use-testing in some >>>> cases. Stable isn't only about building properly. >> and that's why we don't commit straight to stable. people are supposed >> to be testing those ~arch versions for a while before they go stable. >> That testing should cover the use cases you are talking about and work >> out the bugs. Once that's done, we should be able to move the package to >> stable. > > It was recently a discussion in #-dev that could help on this, the > automation can't be only build-testing, but if writing usage-tests > (protocol, interface access testing etc for servers etc) automation > would indeed be helpful. > Isn't the src_test phase psuedo runtime testing? I'm not sure that us developing test suites for upstreams is a good use of our time. I mean, yes, it would improve the upstream projects where they accept it (which is good for all), but I feel it detracts from what Gentoo developers are doing (for Gentoo) -- NP-Hardass