| 1 |
On 10/4/06, Kevin F. Quinn <kevquinn@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:21:08 -0400 |
| 3 |
> "Thomas Cort" <linuxgeek@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > > The "minority" arches like mips, sparc etc seem to get along quite |
| 6 |
> > > happily. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Not the "minority" arches like m68k, s390, alpha, ... |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I haven't seen any significant numbers of complaints. What exactly |
| 11 |
> about those arches do you think is a problem? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
The speed at which bugs are resolved is the problem. Keywording/stable |
| 14 |
bugs can sit for months and sometimes over a year without being |
| 15 |
touched. Some people think the amount of time some arches lag behind |
| 16 |
is acceptable, I don't. The primary reason why arches lag is that we |
| 17 |
don't have enough people doing the testing and keywording. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> You should only raise expectations when you know you can follow through, |
| 20 |
> not the other way around. Raising expectations before being able to |
| 21 |
> follow through leads to disappointment, which is bad. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I think that if we implement my suggestions (drastically reducing the |
| 24 |
workload), we will be able to meet those expectations. |
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives