1 |
15.01.2014 19:30, William Hubbs пишет: |
2 |
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 03:30:39PM +0400, Sergey Popov wrote: |
3 |
>> 15.01.2014 01:37, William Hubbs пишет: |
4 |
>>> All, |
5 |
>>> |
6 |
>>> It is becoming more and more obvious that we do not have enough manpower |
7 |
>>> on the arch teams, even some of the ones we consider major arch's, to |
8 |
>>> keep up with stabilization requests. For example, there is this bug [1], |
9 |
>>> which is blocking the stabilization of several important packages. |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> And by the way, the only arches left there are ppc and ppc64, which are |
12 |
>> NOT major ones. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Sparc is also still on that bug, and according to the council decision I |
15 |
> sited, these arch's are still treated like major arch's. |
16 |
|
17 |
Well, to be honest, personally i consider only amd64 and x86(and maybe |
18 |
arm) as major arches, other are minor in my eyes. Council decision is |
19 |
more about arches, that crucially lacks manpower. |
20 |
|
21 |
> Wrt your comment about x86 and amd64 having agreements that maintainers |
22 |
> can stabilize packages on those arch's, I thought amd64 did, but I |
23 |
> didn't know about x86. |
24 |
|
25 |
It's not mentioned, yeah, i was not aware about it for some time. |
26 |
Probably it should be mentioned in Gentoo Development Guide. |
27 |
|
28 |
> Formal policy says that all stabilizations must be done by arch teams |
29 |
> unless you have special arrangements with them [1], so my questions |
30 |
> still stand. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> 1. Should we make it policy that maintainers can stabilize packages on |
33 |
> arch's they have access to? |
34 |
> |
35 |
> 2. See Rich's message in this thread for my other concern; he spells it |
36 |
> out pretty well -- what should we do about architectures the maintainer |
37 |
> does not have access to? |
38 |
> |
39 |
> 3. Also, another interesting question has come up in this thread, that of |
40 |
> non-binary packages. Should we give maintainers the option of |
41 |
> stabilizing them on all arch's themselves? |
42 |
|
43 |
1. If you know how to test it properly, know arch-specific |
44 |
problems(aligning, endianness, ABI breakage) and how to fix it - then, |
45 |
probably yes. But usually maintainers are bored to do proper testing. |
46 |
2. I think - no. You can not test it - you can not stabilize it, period. |
47 |
3. If code is interpreted rather then compiled, it does not matter that |
48 |
it is properly ported on minor arches. I knew dozens of examples with |
49 |
Perl and Python packages(not sure about Ruby, but Hans said that it |
50 |
happens with it too). So, i would not treat such packages differently. |
51 |
|
52 |
|
53 |
-- |
54 |
Best regards, Sergey Popov |
55 |
Gentoo developer |
56 |
Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead |
57 |
Gentoo Qt project lead |
58 |
Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead |