Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] summary: proposed solutions to arches/stable problem
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:29:25
Message-Id: 1088080259.2939.9.camel@localhost
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] summary: proposed solutions to arches/stable problem by Aron Griffis
1 On Thu, 2004-06-24 at 00:54, Aron Griffis wrote:
2 > Chris Gianelloni wrote: [Wed Jun 23 2004, 12:08:36PM EDT]
3 > > Would comments in the ebuild not be enough? Look at the
4 > > vmware-workstation-4.5.2 ebuild for an example.
5 > >
6 > > I don't see why it would not be easy enough to comment the reasons an
7 > > ebuild might not be marked stable. Another example that I can think of
8 > > is the xorg-x11 ebuilds. You can see an obvious TODO list before it is
9 > > considered stable.
10 >
11 > I don't think comments would be enough. Many arch maintainers are
12 > using ekeyword and ignoring the rest of the ebuild, because it is too
13 > much to take the time to read through every ebuild looking for red
14 > flags. Also, comments make it impossible to use repoman to do the
15 > checking unless they're in a specific format, and at that point you
16 > might as well put things in a variable or in metadata
17
18 I was bringing up the point that a developer should not be marking a
19 package stable on their arch without looking for such things. Many of
20 us are quite intelligent and don't have to have repoman tell us what to
21 do. While it would be nice to have some form of automated check, I
22 think that for the time being the simplest and quickest solution would
23 just be to put comments above/below the KEYWORDS for anyone to quickly
24 see. There's no need to read the entire ebuild, just skim quickly for
25 the KEYWORDS line and check for comments right around it.
26
27 Now, with all that said, I'd love to see some way to automate this
28 process, but I'm more of a fan of getting "something working" going
29 first, then adding polish later, than of sitting around and
30 bureaucratizing every last detail. Adding comments is 100% backwards
31 compatible, requires no extra portage/repoman/e* programming, and is
32 quickly implemented. Sounds like a perfect solution for the interim,
33 and one I plan on continuing to use. *grin*
34
35 --
36 Chris Gianelloni
37 Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
38 Gentoo Linux
39
40 Is your power animal a penguin?

Attachments

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