Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 16:30:16
Message-Id: 4C277CB9.60307@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations by "Olivier CrĂȘte"
1 On 06/27/2010 06:47 PM, Olivier CrĂȘte wrote:
2 > On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 18:04 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
3 >> Moreover, slow arches introduce another problem as well. If a package is
4 >> marked stabled for their arch, but this package is quite old, and they fail to
5 >> stabilize a new version, we ( as maintainers ) can't drop the very old
6 >> ( and obsolete ) version of this package because we somehow will break
7 >> the stable tree for these arches. How should we act in this case?
8 >> Keep the old version around forever just to say that "hey, they do have
9 >> a stable version for our exotic arch".
10 >
11 > I'd propose waiting a bit longer than 30 days.. Maybe 90 days, and then
12 > just drop the old ebuild. These arches will slowly lose stable keywords
13 > until their stable tree gets to a size that they can manage. And
14 > everyone will be winners. That said, when dropping the old keywords, you
15 > have to be careful to drop the stable keyword on all dependencies too so
16 > as to not drop break the tree for them.
17 >
18
19 +1