| 1 |
On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 15:31 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 21:17 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:05:09 +0100 Maurice van der Pot |
| 4 |
> > <griffon26@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > | For instance, checking (for all arches, for all use flag combos) if |
| 6 |
> > | the dependencies are as stable or more stable (x86 > ~x86 > hard |
| 7 |
> > | masked) than the thing depending on it. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Hasn't repoman been doing this correctly for a year or more now? I know |
| 10 |
> > it wasn't the case when I joined, but bug 24160 is long fixed... |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> What if we had a service that did this check plus other stuff repoman |
| 13 |
> doesn't count and report it to some web site that developers can look at |
| 14 |
> daily to see QA bugs? Maybe run it daily or every 6-12 hours? I think |
| 15 |
> someone mentioned something like that once. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I think it would be worth a lot more if it was mailed to the maintainer |
| 19 |
of the ebuild (and perhaps QA?), as it takes time and effort to wade |
| 20 |
through a list (like the been in ~ for x days list that we used to get). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Martin Schlemmer |
| 25 |
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer |
| 26 |
Cape Town, South Africa |
Archives