Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Change or revert the "30 days maintainer timeout" stabilization policy
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 19:24:28
Message-Id: 533C6292.80301@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Change or revert the "30 days maintainer timeout" stabilization policy by Mike Gilbert
1 On 02/04/14 21:22, Mike Gilbert wrote:
2 > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote:
3 >> The "30 days maintainer time out" stabilization policy isn't working
4 >> when package has multiple SLOTs, because
5 >> the bugs are filed for only latest SLOT, where as some packages require
6 >> stabilization in sync at both SLOTs
7 >>
8 >> Option 1:
9 >>
10 >> Either revert the whole policy, and never CC arches on unanswered bugs
11 >> when the package has a maintainer,
12 >> and let him do it when he finds the time himself, and if that doesn't
13 >> happen, wait until it's dropped to maintainer-needed@
14 >>
15 >> Option 2:
16 >>
17 >> Or, the person who is CCing the arches in 30 days timeout, needs to make
18 >> sure the bug covers all SLOT at the same time
19 >>
20 >>
21 >> The status quo no longer allows me to maintain stable version of
22 >> dev-libs/girara, app-text/zathura*, and the issue needs
23 >> to be addressed, see http://bugs.gentoo.org/502714 for what inspired
24 >> this mail
25 >>
26 >> - Samuli
27 >>
28 > If you want to prevent packages from being "timed out", just leave a
29
30 That would require me to take action on the STABLEREQ, which I don't
31 want to do
32 if I see someone requesting it stable only because it's newer version,
33 see below:
34
35 > comment on the bug saying so. If you don't even have time to do that
36 > within a 30 day window, why are you the maintainer?
37
38 It's like we handle stabilization for Xfce, we collect enough xfce-base/
39 and xfce-extra/
40 packages together to form a longer list, to avoid bothering arch teams
41 unnecessarily
42 constantly
43 This time it's app-text/zathura-meta and it's dependencies, multiple
44 packages, we'd
45 like to wait there are enough plugins, and form a list
46
47 And this time the package even had 3 maintainers, 2 gentoo developers
48 and one proxy,
49 in metadata.xml, yet none of us managed to intervene in time to prevent
50 the SLOT breakage[1]
51 done by arches without our consent
52
53 [1] Stabilizing headers, but not the library, causing the .h not to
54 match the .so, causing every
55 reverse dependency of the library to break
56
57 >
58 > Another option would be to add some kind of notation to metadata.xml.
59 >
60
61 That could work

Replies