| 1 |
On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 21:57 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> Yeah, foser's on holiday. Good time to push the GLEP through. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
How typical of you to try and drag this discussion down into something |
| 5 |
personal :( If you keep feeling the need to do this, do everyone a |
| 6 |
favour and keep your mouth shut instead. It detracts from otherwise |
| 7 |
insightful and useful comments. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> The only reason certain arch teams are considered a bottleneck is |
| 10 |
> because they do real testing. As opposed to x86 or ppc, where packages |
| 11 |
> which won't even unpack get marked stable... |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
You can't help yourself, can you? You have to have a pop at someone :( |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I didn't mean "considered", I meant "are". It wasn't a criticism, it's |
| 16 |
just a statement of fact. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
It's impossible for an arch team to keep pace with the rate of change in |
| 19 |
the tree and do adequate testing too. No arch team is currently big |
| 20 |
enough. Arch teams are always going to lag behind what package |
| 21 |
maintainers do. It's a simple numbers game. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
There are only two arch teams with 20 or more members (amd64 and ppc), |
| 24 |
as of 22:30 BST today. They have to deal with the output of approx 155 |
| 25 |
herds, plus countless changes that don't go through herds in the first |
| 26 |
place. The numbers speak for themselves. Arch teams are bottlenecks. |
| 27 |
Until the numbers change, that won't change. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Best regards, |
| 30 |
Stu |
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Stuart Herbert stuart@g.o |
| 33 |
Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ |
| 34 |
http://stu.gnqs.org/diary/ |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu |
| 37 |
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C |
| 38 |
-- |
Archives