1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
3 |
|
4 |
Another possible solution that hasn't been considered is adding another |
5 |
variable to ebuilds, like so: |
6 |
|
7 |
STABLE="yes" |
8 |
|
9 |
If STABLE is set to "yes", then the ebuild is considered stable. If STABLE is |
10 |
missing or set to "no", then it is not. You could go a step further in this |
11 |
and say that if an ebuild is explicitly set to STABLE="no", then that can not |
12 |
move to stable on any arch (for instance, _pre or _rc releases). There's no |
13 |
reason for a repoman QA check to have any effect whatsoever on the user, and |
14 |
this would avoid that. |
15 |
|
16 |
PROS: |
17 |
- avoids the pitfalls of changing KEYWORDS behaviour |
18 |
- avoids issues with KEYWORDS order |
19 |
- Does not require immediate portage upgrade for users |
20 |
- Only requires changes to repoman behaviour |
21 |
|
22 |
CONS: |
23 |
- another environment variable |
24 |
- probably something I'm missing, but I don't see what |
25 |
|
26 |
The STABLE variable can be added to ebuilds at our leisure, when changes are |
27 |
committed to those ebuilds. This doesn't necessarily have to be done by the |
28 |
ebuild maintainer, either. A good rule of thumb could be: |
29 |
|
30 |
If the ebuild is marked stable on x86, then the ebuild should have |
31 |
STABLE="yes" in it. |
32 |
|
33 |
What do you think? Sure would be a lot less painful solutions. |
34 |
|
35 |
- -- |
36 |
Jason Huebel |
37 |
Gentoo/amd64 Strategic Lead |
38 |
Gentoo Developer Relations/Recruiter |
39 |
|
40 |
GPG Public Key: |
41 |
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9BA9E230 |
42 |
|
43 |
"Do not weep; do not wax indignant. Understand." |
44 |
Baruch Spinoza (1632 - 1677) |
45 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
46 |
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) |
47 |
|
48 |
iD8DBQFA2NefbNgbbJup4jARAvlUAJ0QstOCmOr0n0GM/K3eNGnWAsex5gCfVw0A |
49 |
gxtlfIt3NZcVO/tgpKe6jrI= |
50 |
=O/51 |
51 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
52 |
|
53 |
-- |
54 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |