Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:07:58 -0800
Fabian Groffen wrote:
> 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?

We could introduce "noarch" and "~noarch" KEYWORDS, add "noarch" to
the default ACCEPT_KEYWORDS setting for all profiles, and instruct
unstable users to add "~noarch" to ACCEPT_KEYWORDS.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac


Replies:
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Peter Volkov
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
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
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Fabian Groffen
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Next by thread:
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Previous by date:
Last rites for dev-ruby/qt4-qtruby
Next by date:
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations


Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.