| 1 |
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:47:12 -0400 |
| 2 |
Joshua Kinard <kumba@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 06/16/2016 08:04, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:11:30 +0200 |
| 6 |
> > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> >> Right now we have the following components: |
| 9 |
> >> |
| 10 |
> >> - Applications, |
| 11 |
> >> - baselayout, |
| 12 |
> >> - Core system, |
| 13 |
> >> - Development, |
| 14 |
> >> - Eclasses and Profiles, |
| 15 |
> >> - Games, |
| 16 |
> >> - GCC Porting, |
| 17 |
> >> - GNOME, |
| 18 |
> >> - Hardened, |
| 19 |
> >> - Java, |
| 20 |
> >> - KDE, |
| 21 |
> >> - Keywording & Stabilization, |
| 22 |
> >> - Library, |
| 23 |
> >> - New packages ('New ebuilds' previously), |
| 24 |
> >> - Printing, |
| 25 |
> >> - SELinux, |
| 26 |
> >> - Server, |
| 27 |
> >> - Unspecified. |
| 28 |
> > |
| 29 |
> > Revision two: |
| 30 |
> > |
| 31 |
> > - Current packages [bug-wranglers@], |
| 32 |
> > - Eclasses [bug-wranglers@], |
| 33 |
> > - Hardened [hardened@], |
| 34 |
> > - New packages [bug-wranglers@], |
| 35 |
> > - Overlays [overlays@], |
| 36 |
> > - Profiles [bug-wranglers@], |
| 37 |
> > - SELinux [selinux@]. |
| 38 |
> > |
| 39 |
> > Major changes: |
| 40 |
> > |
| 41 |
> > 1. collapsed all category-like components into a single 'Current |
| 42 |
> > packages' that is the default component for pretty much every bug |
| 43 |
> > related to 'standard' configurations of Gentoo Linux -- making it easy |
| 44 |
> > to choose the correct one and ensuring everything goes through |
| 45 |
> > bug-wranglers; |
| 46 |
> > |
| 47 |
> > 2. split 'eclasses & profiles' into two separate categories -- mainly |
| 48 |
> > intended for developer use; |
| 49 |
> > |
| 50 |
> > 3. left 'Hardened' and 'SELinux' (also the whole separate Gentoo/Alt |
| 51 |
> > product) as the non-standard system configurations that desire staging |
| 52 |
> > the bugs through respective teams, |
| 53 |
> > |
| 54 |
> > 4. left 'New packages' as-is, as category for requesting addition |
| 55 |
> > of packages not yet in Gentoo, |
| 56 |
> > |
| 57 |
> > 5. added 'Overlays' component for bugs filed against packages |
| 58 |
> > in third-party repositories (right now some of them got filed pretty |
| 59 |
> > randomly, and having them in Infra->Overlays is kinda wrong), |
| 60 |
> > |
| 61 |
> > 6. removed 'Keywording & stabilization'. As pointed out, those can be |
| 62 |
> > handled via keywords and we already do stabilizations in other places |
| 63 |
> > (e.g. security bugs). |
| 64 |
> > |
| 65 |
> > Your thoughts about this one? |
| 66 |
> |
| 67 |
> I'd add at least an entry for "Toolchain" and route it to the toolchain@g.o |
| 68 |
> address by default. Most users know to assign a majority of gcc-related or |
| 69 |
> binutils-related bugs to toolchain anyways. |
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
Do they? Is it common for them to report bugs in toolchain rather than |
| 72 |
problems caused by toolchain upgrade that are actually bugs in code? |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
> Not sure if gcc-porting should be |
| 75 |
> broken out, though. That is a separate alias that's targeted at working out |
| 76 |
> issues on newer gcc releases and/or new capabilities. |
| 77 |
|
| 78 |
That was my initial thought too. However, then I noticed it actually |
| 79 |
goes to bug-wranglers@... |
| 80 |
|
| 81 |
> I could think of others, like one for Gentoo/Alt, for the FreeBSD and other |
| 82 |
> ports that kinda do their own thing. Linux alt-archs can get sorted out by |
| 83 |
> bug-wranglers. |
| 84 |
|
| 85 |
Gentoo/Alt has its own separate product. Not that this decreases |
| 86 |
confusion but that's how things are right now... |
| 87 |
|
| 88 |
-- |
| 89 |
Best regards, |
| 90 |
Michał Górny |
| 91 |
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/> |
Archives