Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 04:49:56
Message-Id: 20140115044948.GA4345@laptop.home
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy by
1 On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:48:53AM +0700, grozin@g.o wrote:
2 > On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, William Hubbs wrote:
3 > > 1. I think maintainers should be able to stabilize their packages on arch's
4 > > they have access to. I think this is allowed by some arch teams, but I
5 > > think it would be good to formalize it.
6 > +1
7 >
8 > Also, there is a substantial number of packages which contain only python
9 > code (or perl, ruby), or only LaTeX classes, or only documentation. It
10 > makes no sense to test them on each arch separately. I think maintainers
11 > should be allowed to stabilize such packages (with no compiled code) on
12 > all arches.
14 There is a reason we don't do this, back in Gentoo history somewhere, but I
15 don't remember what it was.
17 If someone can tell us why this isn't allowed I am all ears. Otherwise,
18 I could agree on this point as well.
20 William


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature