Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship

Installation:
Gentoo Handbook
Installation Docs

Documentation:
Home
Listing
About Gentoo
Philosophy
Social Contract

Resources:
Bug Tracker
Developer List
Discussion Forums
Gentoo BitTorrents
Gentoo Linux Enhancement Proposals
IRC Channels
Mailing Lists
Mirrors
Name and Logo Guidelines
Online Package Database
Security Announcements
Staffing Needs
Supporting Vendors
View our CVS

Graphics:
Logos and themes
Icons
ScreenShots

Miscellaneous Resources:
Gentoo Linux Store
Gentoo-hosted projects
IBM dW/Intel article archive




List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 15:45:35 +0100
On 06-11-2009 19:48:16 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@g.o> wrote:
> > In the past when smaller arches were not that active we used to mark
> > Java packages stable after testing by at least one arch team. The
> > probability to find arch specific issues in something like Java is not
> > so high so I think arrangements like this are acceptable when the arch
> > teams have problems keeping up.
> 
> I think the same should be extended to other languages such as Perl
> and Python (unless they have portions which are C/C++)

Sounds like we could benefit from the "noarch" approach known in the RPM
world, such that all these packages can also be immediately keyworded
and stabilised for all arches.  Would greatly simplify things for a
great deal of packages, maybe?


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level


Replies:
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Rémi Cardona
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Zac Medico
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Nirbheek Chauhan
References:
[RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Christian Faulhammer
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Markos Chandras
Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Christian Faulhammer
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Ben de Groot
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Joseph Jezak
Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Ryan Hill
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Tobias Klausmann
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Petteri Räty
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Nirbheek Chauhan
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Next by thread:
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Previous by date:
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Next by date:
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations


Updated Mar 22, 2010

Donate to support our development efforts.

Gentoo Centric Hosting: vr.org

VR Hosted

Tek Alchemy

Tek Alchemy

SevenL.net

SevenL.net

php|architect

php|architect

Copyright 2001-2007 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Email www@gentoo.org.