On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Markos Chandras <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I never said to completely drop these arches. When did I say that? I
> just want a more realistic approach on how well an arch is supported.
> Why you people are afraid to admit that we have problems? Having an arch
> with constantly >200 stabilization bugs open clearly proves that the
> manpower cannot handle the situation.
I think it's important to put some numbers on this.
total stable keyword developers
alpha 72 51 12 3
arm 69 22 18 5
hppa 103 71 13 4 (really 2)
ia64 73 45 20 2
mips 21 0 5 6 (wtf?)
ppc 233 171 29 5
ppc64 80 37 24 3
sparc 110 63 27 3
x86 80 2 13
amd64 40 1 7
The only architecture that is seriously backlogged in ppc, which is
probably due to the fact that we used to have lots of users. Just a
couple of weeks ago, ppc64 was in the same situation, until xarthisius
went on a stabilization/keywording spree. So it's definitely possible
to reduce this to a reasonable level, but I think ppc should probably
consider dropping some keywords.
hppa is higher than some others because hppa/linux in general isn't
very stable. sparc is above 100 because armin76 does all the
keywording by himself (I think?).
I actually gave up long ago on my idea of stabilizing mips. It's an
impossible task to do by yourself. Maybe one day if mips becomes a
more common architecture.
On alpha, we (mostly armin76) drop keywords pretty regularly when we
get a stabilization request for a package we've never heard of, and
I'd think other architectures do the same. The architecture teams know
what they can and can't support.