1 |
[+gentoo-dev] |
2 |
|
3 |
I'm just going to jump randomly in here. |
4 |
|
5 |
Also, moving this back to -dev as it is not a private matter. |
6 |
|
7 |
The bread and butter of this is what: |
8 |
|
9 |
A. KDE team drops arch keywords for KDE 4, since KDE4 is new. |
10 |
|
11 |
B. Jer re-keywords KDE4 on HPPA but doesn't try installing the |
12 |
software to make sure it works. |
13 |
|
14 |
C. Jer misses keywords because the KDE team did not provide a distinct |
15 |
list of packages and Jer was relying on repoman to notify him when he |
16 |
broke the deptree for HPPA. Repoman has a bug/feature that caused it |
17 |
to behave in an unexpected manner. |
18 |
|
19 |
So I think most people think A. is an acceptable practice. For all |
20 |
intents and purposes KDE4 is new software. Does anyone disagree with |
21 |
this? |
22 |
|
23 |
I think C is both Jer's and the KDE teams fault. How difficult is it |
24 |
really to produce a distinct package list KDE team? You could always |
25 |
refuse to keyword without such a list. |
26 |
|
27 |
I think B is the real argument here. Typically when commiting |
28 |
packages you are supposed to install them and at least (in the case of |
29 |
KDE) log into KDE and make sure it at least works. |
30 |
|
31 |
Jer, did you do this? If not; do you understand why the other |
32 |
developers are upset? Really I think they just want you to test |
33 |
things you are keywording. |
34 |
|
35 |
-Alec |
36 |
-- |
37 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |