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-project
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-project: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-project@g.o
From: Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o>
Subject: Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2011 13:31:20 +0100
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 08/06/2011 01:24 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> On 06-08-2011 11:59, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 08/06/2011 12:49 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>>> On 06-08-2011 11:00:16 +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>>> Oh come on Jorge. You know what I mean by slacking arches. I am
>>>>  not talking about punishing them. Maybe drop stable keywords
>>>> or drop keyword from X package and shrink their tree so they
>>>> can keep up with the load.
>>>> 
>>>>> This should be the arch more developers use daily and is 
>>>>> likely the one with more members (herd count). Also, one
>>>>> should remember the time it takes to compile, test or debug
>>>>> an issue in a recent amd64 system or an old / slow box with
>>>>> an "exotic arch" varies substantially. Not to mention that
>>>>> the amount of testing done on "exotic arches" varies
>>>>> substantially between projects.
>>>> I am aware of the problems and this is way I want a solution.
> 
>>> And what solution do you have in mind (in your Council role)?
> 
> 
>> Drop stable keywords for certain arches and/or remove their
>> keywords from X packages. The idea is to keep only a single and
>> smaller portage tree which would be much more easier to manage.
>> Pretty much the same situation as MIPS. It worked pretty well on
>> MIPS, so it will work on these arches too
> 
> If you talk to Mike, Raúl and Matt, I'm sure they'll tell you that 
> trying to get an arch out of testing status to supported is a
> nightmare.
Why would you wanna do that? The situation is highly unlikely to change
in the future. It is better to have a fully working testing tree than
pretending to have a usable stable tree. I would accept a solution were
only @system is in stable and everything else is in ~testing.

> AFAIK that was already done once for arm and is happening now for
> mips.
> 
> About the arches with >200 stable bugs, should we have dropped KDE
> from the tree when for years we had >300 open bugs? Should we stop
> doing releases if we have >100 open bugs? What about mysql with >50
> open bugs, etc?
You can't really compare an architecture with a package can you?

> Furthermore, there have been many complaints from arches with a high 
> number of stable bugs that by the time they were working on a stable 
> bug, a maintainer either dropped the version they were testing or 
> somewhere else in the tree someone decided to drop their keywords
> and got their tree broken.
We can't keep old ebuilds around forever just because an arch decides to
act on these bugs after 10 months. I'd say it again, I don't blame them,
they have real lives too.

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
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=TSYO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


References:
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Markos Chandras
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Rich Freeman
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Markos Chandras
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Fabian Groffen
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Markos Chandras
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Patrick Lauer
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Matt Turner
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Markos Chandras
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Markos Chandras
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Fabian Groffen
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Markos Chandras
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
-- Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-project: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
Next by thread:
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
Previous by date:
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
Next by date:
Re: Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years


Updated Jul 05, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-project mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.