Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Slacker arches
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:32:57
Message-Id: 20110125123051.GB25322@Eternity.halls.manchester.ac.uk
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Slacker arches by "Paweł Hajdan
1 On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 01:20:29PM +0100, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
2 > On 1/25/11 12:38 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
3 > > Every arch teams should stabilise OR write out reason why they can't do
4 > > so to stable bug in 90 days. If any arch team fails to do so the
5 > > maintainer can decide to drop their keywords to testing. Given depgraph
6 > > breakages the maintainer can coordinate with the QA team to drop all
7 > > reverse dependencies to testing too.
8 >
9 > Seconded. Reality++
10 >
11 > Be prepared for some issues though. Sometimes maintainers don't agree
12 > with reasons arch teams provide that block stabilizations. In those
13 > cases, who makes the decision? My suggestion is QA.
14 QA is not a solution to everything. The problem Tomas is trying to
15 counter here is the idle/slacking arches. If the arch is active but have some
16 concerns regarding the stabilization then let the maintainer deal with
17 it. This is the way we do it now anyway
18 >
19 > Also, we should have someone to check for stale stabilization bugs. I'm
20 > not sure if all reporters are able to take care of that, especially if
21 > they have a lot of bugs open.
22 >
23 > Paweł
24 >
25 Thats really their problem. Arches can always remove themselves from the
26 bugs. No need to care about stale bugs. If the maintainers don't care
27 then we(arches) don't care.
28
29 Regards,
30 --
31 Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
32 Gentoo Linux Developer
33 Key ID: B4AFF2C2
34 Key FP: 660A 0742 84EC 26F1 9EDB F00A FA83 5A15 B4AF F2C2

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Slacker arches "Paweł Hajdan