Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@g.o>
To: Gentoo Development <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 08:03:39
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy by William Hubbs
1 On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 5:49 AM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
2 >> Also, there is a substantial number of packages which contain only python
3 >> code (or perl, ruby), or only LaTeX classes, or only documentation. It
4 >> makes no sense to test them on each arch separately. I think maintainers
5 >> should be allowed to stabilize such packages (with no compiled code) on
6 >> all arches.
7 >
8 > There is a reason we don't do this, back in Gentoo history somewhere, but I
9 > don't remember what it was.
10 >
11 > If someone can tell us why this isn't allowed I am all ears. Otherwise,
12 > I could agree on this point as well.
14 Yeah, as the python team lead, I feel we could definitely stick some
15 policy bits in (almost) all python packages that says stable for one
16 arch means stable for all arches. Sure, there'd be some fallout, but I
17 suspect that would be very limited, and in return only one arch tester
18 (or the maintainer!) can stabilize for all architectures.
20 Cheers,
22 Dirkjan