On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> 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.

Matt