| 1 |
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 02:32:13AM -0500, Caleb Cushing wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Further, overlays are good places to put ebuilds for software that is more |
| 3 |
> > experimental than what's expected for ~arch. That includes live ebuilds. In the |
| 4 |
> > end, overlays have a (far) lower level of guaranteed quality than the main tree, |
| 5 |
> > for their ebuilds |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> because ~arch is supposed to work? take open bug on wine-1.1.16 it |
| 8 |
> doesn't build on amd64 and yet it's ~amd64. how about that nam ebuild |
| 9 |
> that has invalid bash that I mentioned? that's some quality work |
| 10 |
> there. The point is the tree is no better or worse than the overlays |
| 11 |
> in many cases. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Heh, that's the problem with ~arch. ~amd64 keywords aren't added for |
| 14 |
every new version; keywords are carried over from the previous version. |
| 15 |
Having to test each new version of a package before it receiving a |
| 16 |
keyword puts far too much stress on the arch teams(who are struggling |
| 17 |
under the current workload, a lot of >75 stable request bugs). What |
| 18 |
happens is the keyword gets carried over from the previous version. So |
| 19 |
if a developer screws up, the arch teams really have no idea because 1) |
| 20 |
we don't get assigned any bug with our keyword in it. 2) We don't run |
| 21 |
~arch. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
--------- |
| 25 |
Thomas Anderson |
| 26 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 27 |
///////// |
| 28 |
Areas of responsibility: |
| 29 |
AMD64, Secretary to the Gentoo Council |
| 30 |
--------- |
Archives