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: Peter Volkov <pva@g.o>
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:54:25 +0300
В Птн, 06/11/2009 в 14:07 -0800, Zac Medico пишет:
> 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.

Looks like this will not work for all noarch packages. Stardict
dictionary itself is noarch, but it RDEPENDS on stardict package which
is keyworded only on some archs. So we'll be forced either to keyword
stardict on all archs or we need to introduce some new way to work with
such situations.


-- 
Peter.



Replies:
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Fabian Groffen
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Zac Medico
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
Re: Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
-- Zac Medico
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:
QA: package.mask policies


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.