1 |
On Mon, 2003-04-14 at 03:32, Fredrik Jagenheim wrote: |
2 |
> Thus, I propose an extension to emerge that would look through your |
3 |
> system and see which packages are marked as 'unstable' and ask the |
4 |
> user interactively if they think the packages are OK. The responses |
5 |
> could be of the type: |
6 |
> 1) Yes, I've used it extensively and it works. |
7 |
> 2) Yes, I've used it somewhat and it seems to work. |
8 |
> 3) No idea, I don't think I've used it, but nothing is broke. |
9 |
> 4) No idea, I haven't used it at all yet. |
10 |
> 5) No, it doesn't work and I've used bugzilla to report the bug. |
11 |
|
12 |
With some criteria this would be a good idea. |
13 |
|
14 |
A big question is whether or not Gentoo should concern itself with the |
15 |
operational functionality of the package in question. A 'does it build' |
16 |
criteria would very efficiently mark packages stable. |
17 |
|
18 |
But what if a new point release of foo introduces a bug that causes a |
19 |
crash? Should Gentoo be responsible for marking the package stable or |
20 |
unstable on that basis? |
21 |
|
22 |
I don't think this is practical, although this is what seems to occur |
23 |
fairly regularly based on my perusal of bugs.gentoo.org. This tends to |
24 |
cause ebuilds which otherwise work fine to remain marked unstable even |
25 |
if the user reporting the bug has made a mistake. |
26 |
|
27 |
Perhaps a combination. If it builds succesfully with ALSA, KDE, GNOME in |
28 |
the USE flags and sufficient numbers of people report this, mark it |
29 |
stable. Also leave three prior release versions available for |
30 |
installation marked stable in case the latest introduces a flaw caused |
31 |
by programmer error. Introduce patches and fixes to the ebuilds as bugs |
32 |
are reported. |
33 |
|
34 |
-- |
35 |
// -- http://www.BRAD-X.com/ -- // |
36 |
|
37 |
|
38 |
-- |
39 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |