| 1 |
On 07/11/2017 04:21 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 07/12/2017 12:15 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 07/11/2017 04:13 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On 07/11/2017 03:47 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>> The main risk of breakage of a package moving from testing to |
| 6 |
>>>> stable is always at build time anyway. |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>> citation needed |
| 9 |
>>> |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> Anecdotal evidence against, currently gnupg 2.1.21 scdaemon bug will |
| 12 |
>> happily sign a third party public keyblock's UID using signature subkey |
| 13 |
>> on smartcard, which results in useless signature that doesn't have any |
| 14 |
>> effect, but the application builds fine. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> This means gnupg 2.1.21 is not a candidate for stabilization, but it |
| 17 |
>> certainly builds fine. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Stop trolling - you know perfectly well that this sort of issue would |
| 21 |
> never ever be caught during arch testing. Nor should it be - it's called |
| 22 |
> *arch* testing for a reason. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
That presumes that the maintainer is the one calling for the |
| 25 |
stabilization, and it is not an automated procedure simply due to 30 |
| 26 |
days in ~arch. In this particular case, look for the number of bug |
| 27 |
reports filed in Gentoo for the issue. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
But the main risk is certainly not built testing, it is breaking |
| 30 |
operational live stable systems. Nowhere was it claimed that the arch |
| 31 |
testers are responsible for it, but it certainly doesn't coincide, at |
| 32 |
any point, with "The main risk of breakage of a package moving from |
| 33 |
testing to stable is always at build time anyway." |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Kristian Fiskerstrand |
| 37 |
OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net |
| 38 |
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3 |
Archives