| 1 |
Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> napisał: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>El mié, 11-02-2015 a las 09:22 +0100, Jeroen Roovers escribió: |
| 4 |
>> On Sun, 08 Feb 2015 11:17:19 +0100 |
| 5 |
>> Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> > Many times has raised the question about how we could handle those |
| 8 |
>> > packages (like icon packs, wallpapers...) that are not arch |
| 9 |
>dependent |
| 10 |
>> > and, then, could be stabilized all at the same time by the first |
| 11 |
>arch |
| 12 |
>> > team that is going to stabilize it. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> If you do that, then what is the point of having a stable request in |
| 15 |
>> the first place? The many-eyeballs argument is gone then, so what are |
| 16 |
>we |
| 17 |
>> left with? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
>The point is to test if it breaks depending on the arch, not to get it |
| 20 |
>tested by maintainers + a random of arch teams depending on each |
| 21 |
>package |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
>For example, for ubuntu-wallpapers package there is no need to overload |
| 24 |
>three different arch-teams (or even more if it was keyworded on more |
| 25 |
>arches) |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
But what if the wallpapers contain exploits that work only on specific arches? ;) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
>> |
| 31 |
>> It isn't a team that is doing the stabilisation, it's a single person |
| 32 |
>> who may or may not have looked at what the new version does and how |
| 33 |
>> well it installs, and may or may not feel some pressure to rush it. |
| 34 |
>> |
| 35 |
>> As I said before many times, having more people on more architecture |
| 36 |
>> teams look at the same problem actually helps catch bug at a late |
| 37 |
>> stage but arguably still in time. Removing or weakening that last |
| 38 |
>line |
| 39 |
>> of defence (either by having a single person do stabilisations for |
| 40 |
>> multiple architectures, or by removing most architecture teams from |
| 41 |
>each |
| 42 |
>> single task) will increase the bug rate for stable ebuilds (even |
| 43 |
>more). |
| 44 |
>> |
| 45 |
>> |
| 46 |
>> jer |
| 47 |
>> |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
>Current situation only leads to stabilizations hanging for months with |
| 50 |
>some arch teams having really big pending lists (taking care of their |
| 51 |
>rate of stabling). Of course, if you want to have an exception for HPPA |
| 52 |
>(as it has for other stuff like the profiles), there is no problem. We |
| 53 |
>can keep leaving hppa there if you want to double check them (HPPA is |
| 54 |
>not a problem as it has a stable tree that is small enough to be |
| 55 |
>maintainable) |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Of course there's always the option of dropping stable keywords. |
| 58 |
-- |
| 59 |
Michał Górny |
Archives