1 |
On 05/19/2016 07:51 AM, Jeroen Roovers wrote: |
2 |
> Perhaps it's a good idea to add a section to the devmanual about adding |
3 |
> new keywords to packages. |
4 |
> |
5 |
> Recruits in particular might benefit from some background on what |
6 |
> keywording means and when it should be done, especially before they |
7 |
> start maintaining packages and then realise their packages are so |
8 |
> beautiful that they positively *deserve* to have some random keywords |
9 |
> added. This is not productive. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> The way it works is that users of |
12 |
> specific architectures find that a package works for them on their |
13 |
> systems (which have enough resources and have the correct interfaces for |
14 |
> that particular program to be used conveniently, and so on), and that |
15 |
> they then request that their architecture keyword be added. What |
16 |
> doesn't work is having a handful of keywords on a package that nobody |
17 |
> cares about who actually uses the architectures in question. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Since over the years the Random Keyword Requests happen a *lot* right |
20 |
> after recruitment, it might even be useful to ask about this in the |
21 |
> quizzes. (The answer: your time is better spent fixing actual bugs. |
22 |
> bumping versions, adding features and maintaining a stable branch, |
23 |
> rather than raising the architecture count for your packages for no |
24 |
> adequately explored reason.) |
25 |
> |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Kind regards, |
28 |
> jer |
29 |
> |
30 |
To make sure I understand what you're getting at, are you saying some |
31 |
devs get on board and then request to add keywords to packages that they |
32 |
already maintain? If said arches are already supported in Gentoo I see |
33 |
little problem with that, especially if they intend on being part of the |
34 |
arch testing team for that arch or have access to the hardware. |
35 |
|
36 |
But if this is a case of developers asking for arch keywords to be added |
37 |
for arches that aren't (yet) supported in Gentoo, I agree that we need |
38 |
some sort of formal requirements, much like we do for stabilization (30 |
39 |
days no bugs, etc). Covering it in the devmanual is a great idea. |
40 |
|
41 |
How many packages do you think is necessary before 'critical mass' is |
42 |
reached and Gentoo should support it? I'm thinking it's less about the |
43 |
number of packages, and more about the community around that arch as |
44 |
well as whether or not a stage3 can be built for that arch in a |
45 |
reasonable timeframe. If it can get coreutils up and going, a stage3 can |
46 |
be built, and the handbook can be followed for that arch without issues |
47 |
(say, with an overlay), it seems like that would be a case for adding |
48 |
the keyword. |
49 |
|
50 |
But adding keywords, as we know, comes with maintenance burden. New |
51 |
arches can't get supported without people active in the community and |
52 |
actually using the hardware. If that interest isn't there, why should we |
53 |
add the keywords to the main repo? Overlays may be a fine alternative. |
54 |
|
55 |
Just my 2ยข. Thanks for bringing this up, it's a topic I didn't know was |
56 |
a concern. |
57 |
|
58 |
-- |
59 |
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer |
60 |
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net |
61 |
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 |