Re: [gentoo-dev] let's clear things up (was Slacker archs)

[Daniel Gryniewicz]

On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 08:11 -0500, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 01:35:32 +0000
> Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org> wrote:
>
> > It is widely perceived that Gentoo has a huge problem with slacker
> > archs cluttering up the tree and making maintainers' work harder.
> > Clearly, something needs to be done about this.
>
> <snip>
>
> Wow, I almost don't know where to begin.  The amount of FUD,
> misinformation, and outright lies floating around all of this bullshit
> is astounding.

<snip again>

I'd like to chime in here, if I may, with some personal experience.
I've been involved with arch keywording from both sides (being in the
amd64 herd, and being the current gnome lead), and I have to say that
it's definitely blown out of proportion.  Yes, keyword bugs slip through
the cracks.  Some of my gnome keyword bugs hang around forever;
sometimes, in my bug sweeps for amd64, I find keyword bugs that have
been hanging around forever.  It happens.  However, there have been a
number of cases recently for gnome where we wanted to punt old versions
of gnome.  We like to only keep 1-2 old versions around, so we remove
whole sets of packages every 6-8 months.  In this, we're probably close
to unique.  Many of these are newest keyworded versions on some arch or
other.  Generally, all the arches have been responsive to the problem,
either by keywording newer versions, or by agreeing to drop keywords.
Again, there's the odd case; but that seems to mostly be oversight.

Summary: I don't see a real problem with any arch, mips included, either
from the arch side or from the gnome side.  There's more gnome cruft in
the tree from us failing to clean intermediate versions up than there is
from "slacker" arches.

Daniel

-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list