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: Tobias Scherbaum <dertobi123@g.o>
Subject: Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:08:39 +0100
Matti Bickel wrote:
> Tobias Scherbaum <dertobi123@g.o> wrote:
> > What if this would break deps or it's a very common package for example
> > belonging to the set of system packages?
> 
> Then the maintainer moans and does nothing. I guess that's where the
> "MAY" part from above comes in. Policy should not be an excuse to stop
> thinking. And if i break a user system when i drop my stable keywords,
> IMHO i'm violating the 'work as pleasently and efficiently as possible'
> bit of our philosophy.

That would people require to use common sense. The past has shown that
people tend to have different views of what common sense might be in a
given case. Therefore policy in that aspect needs to be as clear and
understandable as possible to avoid unnecessary discussions.

> So bottom-line: i'm very much in favour of your solution to question #1.
> And i'd like to stress the "automatic" bit. Yes, we can get access to
> tinderboxes. But last i looked, this involved tracking down the person
> responsible for it, asking for access and doing everything you need to
> get your package to compile. Well, i'm lazy, so i didn't do it.
> 
> Automatic tinderbox testing would very much help in the process. Maybe
> someone can write a script so that once a maintainer opens/gives his OK
> to a stable bug, automatic testing could be started and the results
> posted back to the bug?

Sounds like a very good and doable idea to me. Process might be as easy
as CC'ing a arch-tinderbox on a bug, a script does parse the bug number
out of the mail being sent out and using gatt it catches the ebuild to
test, compiles it and reports back a) failure/success, b) error log as
attachment if it fails plus c) if there was a test-phase.

Might be just a quick hack using pybugz and gatt :)

> After the timeframe (30 days? 60? I don't know, and it's not important
> at this point) maintainers could move to stable their package themself
> IF the automatic tests indicate success AND no arch member has spoken
> up.

Agreed.

  Tobias
-- 
Gentoo Linux - Die Metadistribution
http://www.mitp.de/5941
http://www.metadistribution.eu

https://www.xing.com/profile/Tobias_Scherbaum
Attachment:
signature.asc (Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil)
Replies:
Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
-- Donnie Berkholz
Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
-- Duncan
References:
Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
-- Mark Loeser
Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
-- Tobias Scherbaum
Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
-- Matti Bickel
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
Next by thread:
Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
Previous by date:
Re: Package up for grabs
Next by date:
Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds


Updated Jun 17, 2009

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.