| 1 |
El vie, 25-07-2014 a las 15:38 -0400, Anthony G. Basile escribió: |
| 2 |
> On 07/25/14 15:28, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
| 3 |
> > That is the reason for me thinking that maybe the way to go would be to |
| 4 |
> > do the opposite -> keep only base-system and a few others stable and |
| 5 |
> > drop stable for most of the rest. This big effort could be accomplished |
| 6 |
> > in a week by other developers willing to help (like me) and would solve |
| 7 |
> > the issue for the long term. I guess that is what HPPA team did in the |
| 8 |
> > past and I think it's working pretty well for them (in summary, have a |
| 9 |
> > stable tree they are able to keep stable). That will also help people in |
| 10 |
> > ppc* teams to know that the remaining stabilization bugs, apart of being |
| 11 |
> > much less, are important enough to deserve rapid attention, as opposed |
| 12 |
> > to current situation that will have some important bugs mixed with tons |
| 13 |
> > of stabilization requests of apps that got ppc stable keywords years ago |
| 14 |
> > and are currently no so important. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Yes, please let's just do base system stable. I've been randomly taking |
| 18 |
> care of ppc but nothing systematic. Its pretty spotty. But at the same |
| 19 |
> time I don't like the idea of just loosing all the stabilization effort |
| 20 |
> on the base system, so that might work best. Something to think about |
| 21 |
> for mips too. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Nice, one think we would need to discuss is what do we consider base |
| 26 |
system :/ |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I guess packages maintained by base-system, toolchain and... xorg-server |
| 29 |
and co... what more |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Not sure if we could have a list of current stable tree for ppc*, once |
| 32 |
do we have that list, ppc* teams can drop from that list what they want |
| 33 |
and we get a new list that will be the final result. What do you think |
| 34 |
about that? |
Archives