Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>, Richard Freeman <rich0@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:27:56
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree by William Hubbs
1 On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:12 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
2 > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 02:33:52PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
3 >> I'd rather see maintainers just yank the last stable package and break
4 >> the depgraph and let the arch teams deal with the cleanup than have
5 >> them mark stuff stable without any testing at all. Or build a script
6 >> that does the keyword cleanup for them. De-keywording late stable
7 >> requests is a solution that is self-correcting. As packages are
8 >> reduced from the stable set then there are fewer stable requests and
9 >> the arch team is better able to focus on the ones they deem important.
10 >> Throwing more packages in stable that aren't actually stable just
11 >> makes that problem worse, and destroys whatever value the stable
12 >> keyword had on the arch. For small arch teams they really should be
13 >> focusing their time on core packages.
14 >
15 > Rich, This was my original thinking about this issue. It turned out to
16 > be more controversial than I originally thought -- folks told me that
17 > stable tree users expect stability above all, so breaking the depgraph
18 > is unacceptable, so I'm just trying to find something that is more
19 > palletable.
20 >
22 Well, I wasn't suggesting that breaking the depgraph is great. Just
23 that I think it is better than calling things stable which aren't.
25 A better approach is a script that does the keyword cleanup.
27 So, if you want to reap an ebuild you run "destabilize
28 foo-1.2.ebuild". It searches the tree for all reverse deps and
29 removes stable keywords from those. Then you commit all of that in
30 one commit.
32 If you want to be extra nice you stick it in a pull request in github
33 and point it out to the arch team and ask them if they're sure they
34 don't want to stabilize your package... :)
36 --
37 Rich