| 1 |
Raúl Porcel wrote: |
| 2 |
> Peter Weller wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> Oh, I'd be more than happy to accept help from developers like that. |
| 5 |
>> It's just a case of what the "big bosses" think of it. Plus there's |
| 6 |
>> the fact that some other arches operate on a "it compiles, mark it |
| 7 |
>> stable" policy, and we don't want developers to bring that attitude to |
| 8 |
>> the amd64 team. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Hope you're not referring to any of my arches because that's not true :) |
| 11 |
> In fact, if i did that, i wouldn't crash the alpha dev box so often, |
| 12 |
> right Tobias? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I dunno - I just hit bug 211021 today while trying to clean out old |
| 16 |
bugs. Already stable on one arch and not a word from the maintainer. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I do agree with many of the posts in this thread by others - a big issue |
| 19 |
is manpower. However, I did want to mention that stabling packages |
| 20 |
without input from maintainers seems to be a moderately-common practice. |
| 21 |
I'm sure the arch team leaders would welcome help if it were offered, |
| 22 |
but it is more important that packages keyworded stable actually work |
| 23 |
than for the latest-and-greatest package to be marked stable. |
| 24 |
Interested users can volunteer to be ATs as well - in my past experience |
| 25 |
as an AT when I keyworded a bug STABLE I could expect to see it |
| 26 |
committed by a dev within a few hours. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
While amd64 is a lot more mainstream than it used to be you can't just |
| 29 |
assume that upstream wouldn't have released something if it didn't work |
| 30 |
perfectly on amd64. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Somebody had commented that there are cases where there are |
| 33 |
already-stable packages with bugs in them that are causing problems. |
| 34 |
Feel free to ping one of us, or start a discussion on the -amd64 mailing |
| 35 |
list, or email the amd64@ alias if necessary if something in particular |
| 36 |
is causing major headaches. Simply posting a comment in bug 37 out of |
| 37 |
250 probably won't get much attention. I'm sure all the amd64 devs want |
| 38 |
to do what they can to help out those with more obscure packages. There |
| 39 |
are a LOT of packages marked stable on amd64 though, and while it has |
| 40 |
improved greatly upstream still doesn't support it as well as it does |
| 41 |
x86 (though I'm sure we won't get much sympathy from most of the other |
| 42 |
archs in this regard :) ). |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
No disputing that there is a problem - we just want to be careful that |
| 45 |
the solution isn't worse than the problem... |
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives