1 |
On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 22:49 -0600, William Hubbs wrote: |
2 |
> > Also, there is a substantial number of packages which contain only python |
3 |
> > code (or perl, ruby), or only LaTeX classes, or only documentation. It |
4 |
> > makes no sense to test them on each arch separately. I think maintainers |
5 |
> > should be allowed to stabilize such packages (with no compiled code) on |
6 |
> > all arches. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> There is a reason we don't do this, back in Gentoo history somewhere, but I |
9 |
> don't remember what it was. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> If someone can tell us why this isn't allowed I am all ears. Otherwise, |
12 |
> I could agree on this point as well. |
13 |
|
14 |
Speaking for ruby I have seen various arch-related bugs in pure ruby |
15 |
code. It doesn't happen a lot (maybe 1% of stable requests) but it is |
16 |
also not predictable. |
17 |
|
18 |
I also like the second set of eyes verifying what we've done as part of |
19 |
marking a package stable, so I probably would still file bugs rather |
20 |
than marking stuff stable myself. |
21 |
|
22 |
Hans |