Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:09:08
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations by Markos Chandras
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 3:08 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 01:59:42AM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: >> Now *this* is a problem. We have some bugs, some security bugs that >> have been completely ignored by some arches. Mips as usual is one, but >> recently hppa (and to a much lesser extent, ppc64) have become slow. >> >> To fix this, I suggest the following heuristic: >> >> * If an arch cannot stabilize *security bugs* after 3 months, the >> maintainers are free to drop the vulnerable version. > > What if this version is the only one that is stabled for this arch. Can > you imagine the possible breakage that this action might cause? > > The problem is exactly here. > > If a package has only one version stable for an exotic arch, you cannot > drop it because: > > * you will break packages that depend on it > * you will make users angry >
I agree. I didn't mean to imply that these heuristics were in any way complete. I wrote them in a hurry; I only wanted to give an idea of what my opinion on the matter is. We can add the following: * For each arch, stable keywords are to be removed from vulnerable/broken versions one week after newer versions are stabilized on that arch. * If removing stable keywords will lead to a large cascading effect of reverse dependencies losing stable keywords, the 3 month wait should be extended to 6 months or 12 months depending on the brokenness and no. of packages that will get their keywords dropped. * Maintainers are free to wait as long as they wish for arches, the above guidelines merely give a lower bound to the wait time. * In extenuating circumstances (critical vulnerabilities, complete brokenness, etc), with the permission of the QA team, the wait can be shortened, but it should never be less than a month. This means that old broken/vulnerable ebuilds are not visible to any arches except those that are slow. And if an arch cannot take out the time to stabilized a vulnerable and/or badly broken version for a full year, there's nothing we can do. If this is a chronic problem, we should consider marking the arch as "Experimental". -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team