| 1 |
Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> posted |
| 2 |
200704132301.41614.vapier@g.o, excerpted below, on Fri, 13 Apr |
| 3 |
2007 23:01:40 -0400: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> they realize they have no way at all of disabling the mandatory test ... |
| 6 |
> RESTRICT is an ebuild variable, not a package manager variable |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> this is why implementing it via the profile FEATURES works ... users can |
| 9 |
> still easily opt out and in case of some catastrofuck and we havent |
| 10 |
> screwed ourselves into a corner by mixing policy with spec |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Why not keep the feature but simply default it to ON instead of OFF? |
| 13 |
That's what I had assumed all along, and in fact seems to have been what |
| 14 |
was proposed since in several places the argument was that devs would be |
| 15 |
testing it anyway, thus implying the option remains NOT to test it. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
As I've said a couple times now, however, adding FEATURES=bigtest would |
| 18 |
IMO be useful, then let the ebuild use that for extra resource intensive |
| 19 |
tests or the like. Default would be FEATURES="test -bigtest", thus |
| 20 |
advancing the default QA for everyone, while continuing to allow users to |
| 21 |
opt-in/out entirely if desired. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
As for non-maintainer archs, the maintainer would test it on his arch, |
| 24 |
and arch-teams would test it on theirs before keywording stable. Those |
| 25 |
(like myself) running ~arch on non-maintainer archs should be prepared to |
| 26 |
live with the consequences of that choice anyway, including the |
| 27 |
occasional test failure on their arch because the maintainer didn't test |
| 28 |
it there and the arch-team hasn't gotten to it yet. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 32 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 33 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives