| 1 |
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 15:19:59 -0400 |
| 2 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o> |
| 5 |
> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > A test of a package to determine whether it appears to be working |
| 8 |
> > OK or whether it destructs your system isn't too much asked for; if |
| 9 |
> > it works it can then be ~arch tested, if it breaks you have a bug # |
| 10 |
> > for p.mask. |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > If someone can't test it at all, why was it added in the first |
| 13 |
> > place? |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> So that it can be tested? Maybe the maintainer doesn't have the |
| 16 |
> ability to test the package (might require special hardware). Maybe |
| 17 |
> the maintainer doesn't have the time to test it right away, but wants |
| 18 |
> to allow others to do so (especially if others show an interest). |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
That is an edge case; it's somewhat hard to maintain a package if you |
| 21 |
can't test it, and there are occasions (eg. Amazon EC2 related |
| 22 |
packages) where this is indeed needed. I don't see a need to introduce |
| 23 |
that masked though; but again, it depends on how edgy it is... |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> Sure, I can set up yet another overlay, which will be empty 99% of the |
| 26 |
> time. But, what is the harm in just using a mask? I've yet to leave |
| 27 |
> one sitting around for years (well, not for testing at least). |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
No problem with that if it is for a safe introduction, although I'm |
| 30 |
not quite sure how much that really invites actual testing; however |
| 31 |
it's not about that, everything that stays longer forms the problem. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
With kind regards, |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Tom Wijsman (TomWij) |
| 37 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
E-mail address : TomWij@g.o |
| 40 |
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D |
| 41 |
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D |
Archives