Re: [gentoo-dev] proposed solution to arches/stable problem

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Tue, 2004-06-22 at 10:44, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I've read through most of these arches vs. maintainers threads.  It
> sounds like Carsten hits the nail on the head with this paragraph:
>
>     But isn't exactly this an issue? You don't know which arch the
>     package maintainer is using and checking against a single arch
>     doesn't work, because a maintainer could mark it stable on his
>     arch for some reason before the package maintainer had done this?
>     So the first arch maintainer goes ahead, the next one thinks "oh,
>     seems like the package maintainer marked it stable", gets bitten
>     and the package maintainer has to resolve resulting problems
>     (possibly including blame by users)?
>
> So let's use one more KEYWORD: stable.  This KEYWORD would be set by
> the package maintainer to indicate her impression of what versions
> should be considered stable.  This would have the following effects:
>
>     1. Repoman could check keyword changes, warning arch maintainers
>        when they mark a version arch-stable that is not marked stable
>        by the maintainer.
>
>     2. Bugs can be assigned appropriately:
>
>         stable            -- assign maintainer, cc arch team
>         not stable, arch  -- assign arch team, cc maintainer
>         not stable, ~arch -- assign maintainer, cc arch team
>
> This makes it clear that arches that choose to move ahead of the
> maintainer get to deal with the bugs until the maintainer "catches
> up".
>
> Thoughts?

This would probably fit in perfectly with GLEP 19, as they both propose
the same KEYWORD addition.

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0019.html

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list