| 1 |
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 08/06/2011 04:33 PM, Matt Turner wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> |
| 4 |
>> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> I never said to completely drop these arches. When did I say that? |
| 6 |
>>> I just want a more realistic approach on how well an arch is |
| 7 |
>>> supported. Why you people are afraid to admit that we have |
| 8 |
>>> problems? Having an arch with constantly >200 stabilization bugs |
| 9 |
>>> open clearly proves that the manpower cannot handle the situation. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> I think it's important to put some numbers on this. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> x86 80 2 13 amd64 40 1 7 |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> This is just hilarious :) The numbers of developers are not even close |
| 16 |
> to reality |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Same situation with the rest of the architectures, really. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
>> The only architecture that is seriously backlogged in ppc, which is |
| 21 |
>> probably due to the fact that we used to have lots of users. Just a |
| 22 |
>> couple of weeks ago, ppc64 was in the same situation, until |
| 23 |
>> xarthisius |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> What if xarthisius, armin76, me and jer take 3 months off? What an evil |
| 26 |
> scenario :). The problem is when an architecture relies on a *single* |
| 27 |
> (or max 2) developers. You can't possibly claim that this architecture |
| 28 |
> is supported. You have a single/double point of failure. They can easily |
| 29 |
> retire someday or even lose their motivation. And then what? It would be |
| 30 |
> far too late to act |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
We're in pretty bad shape if that happens. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
We do have http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/infrastructure/dev-machines.xml |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Maintainers could help arch teams greatly by giving their package a |
| 37 |
quick test build on the development boxes. Not sure that's really an |
| 38 |
acceptable solution though. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
I wonder if we can't set up an automated system where a package |
| 41 |
maintainer goes to a webpage and enters the package they'd like to |
| 42 |
submit for a keyword request. The page would display the requirements |
| 43 |
for each architecture, and the maintainer could then start a test |
| 44 |
build that would run on the development boxes in a testing chroot, and |
| 45 |
then give the results back to the maintainer. That would certainly |
| 46 |
make the situation simpler for everyone. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Maybe that's deserving of a separation thread. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Matt |
Archives