Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Markus Meier <maekke@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts?
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 19:46:19
Message-Id: 20170725214511.7201f900@dell-xps13.lan
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts? by Agostino Sarubbo
1 On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:03:30 +0200
2 Agostino Sarubbo <ago@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > On Monday 24 July 2017 22:22:23 Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
5 > > 1. lack of automation
6 > I'd summarize the techical steps into:
7 > 1) get the list of packages
8 > 2) test
9 > 3) commit to git
10 > 4) write on bugzilla
11 >
12 > 1 is done by getatoms https://github.com/kensington/bugbot
13 > 2 is done by the tester in the manner he prefer
14 > 3 no official tool available, I used a modified version of
15 > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/arch-tools.git/tree/batch-stabilize.py
16 > which is still based on CVS
17 > 4 no official tool available, I used my own bash script which calls
18 > pybugz
19 >
20 > So, points 3 and 4 needs to be improved, I have the idea on how the
21 > script should look, but I have no time to do it and no python
22 > knowledge. I can assist everyone that candidate itself to make the
23 > tool/script like I did with kensington when he made getatoms.
24
25 for 3 and 4 there's the keyword.sh script in my overlay (under scripts)
26 that has been working for ages (at least for me)...
27
28
29 Regards,
30 Markus

Replies