Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "PaweĊ‚ Hajdan
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] mass stabilization and non-x86-non-amd64 arches
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 15:24:49
1 For several mass-filed stabilization bugs I got comments why I didn't cc
2 arches like ppc.
4 One problem is that I cc x86 and amd64 via "edit many bugs at once"
5 Bugzilla feature, and when filing bugs the script checks that it's
6 repoman-possible to stabilize given package on x86 and amd64.
8 Not all packages are even keyworded ~ppc, and I guess there are packages
9 that can be stabilized on x86 and amd64, but not ppc because of ~ppc
10 dependencies.
12 All of that is of course solvable with a smarter script, however I'm
13 really worried about the additional load on the "rare arches". I
14 frequently notice they drop stable keywords when asked for a
15 stabilization of some rare package (and I'm fine with that), and they
16 may be annoyed by stabilization requests for minor and revision bumps
17 (which are fine at least for x86, because of the batch-stabilization
18 workflow; of course other arches are welcome to adopt it too).
20 What do you think? Should I make my scripts smarter, or is it fine to
21 just cc x86 and amd64? Is anyone from non-x86-non-amd64 arch teams
22 annoyed by the queue of stabilization bugs?


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature