| 1 |
Dnia 11 stycznia 2018 07:07:30 CET, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 2 |
>>>>>> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> Given the new semantic meaning of profile statuses, |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>Huh? Have I missed something? Please provide a pointer to the |
| 7 |
>discussion. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/81afaadf4caa1e733cb058a37d3638c4 |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
If you can call it a discussion, given it's much less important than whether people will be able to theoretically freely reply to threads such as that. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
It's also on the agenda, so I'm adding patches. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
>> reduce most of the current exp profiles that are known or likely to |
| 17 |
>> have broken depgraph to dev status. Those profiles will be moved |
| 18 |
>> one-by-one back to exp once the integrity of their depgraph is |
| 19 |
>> confirmed. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
>So you're *promoting* the ones considered to be broken from "exp" |
| 22 |
>to "dev"? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Please point me to one bit of documentation that says that 'dev' is better than 'exp' because I haven't been able to find any. Well, except the fact that PMS lists 'stable' and 'dev' as example statuses, and doesn't list 'exp' at all. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
That said, repoman currently treats failures in exp as errors, while in dev as warnings. This makes me believe 'exp' was considered higher. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Furthermore, the switch for -e is boolean, while -d is unary. So we can enable testing exp by default without having to change usage of repoman. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
>Ulrich |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Best regards, |
| 36 |
Michał Górny (by phone) |
Archives