Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Guarantees of unstable architectures
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 20:43:37
Message-Id: 020ae083e8f14107626ad8c87d7813e383a61cac.camel@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Guarantees of unstable architectures by Marek Szuba
1 On Mon, 2021-07-26 at 17:23 +0100, Marek Szuba wrote:
2 > Dear everyone,
3 >
4 > During the open-floor part of this month's Council meeting I asked
5 > whether there is any official policy regarding what is or is not
6 > guaranteed for hardware architectures we do not consider stable in
7 > Gentoo. For reference, according to the current version of
8 > profiles/arches.desc (commit 7bdebec50c44c0222bf76334c34926b593e94dd4,
9 > dated 2021-04-05) this means: alpha, ia64, m68k, mips, riscv, s390,
10 > and all Prefix arches.
11
12 For a start, your list includes architectures that have profiles with
13 various levels of stability. Rules for stable/dev profiles are
14 different than rules for exp profiles, and therefore all architectures
15 that do not have stable/dev profiles give lower stability guarantees.
16
17 As for the remaining architectures, I don't think the rules for
18 architecture that doesn't have stable keywords should be different than
19 rules for ~arch packages on an architecture with stable keywords.
20
21 > As it turns out, we do not in fact have any such policy. On the other
22 > hand, during my time as a Gentoo developer I have heard from other
23 > developers a fairly wide range of opinions on the subject - from
24 > insisting on clean QA results, passing tests etc. regardless of whether
25 > an arch is stable or not to assuming we guarantee nothing for unstable
26 > arches.
27 >
28 > Anyway, it has been decided that it makes sense to discuss this on the
29 > mailing list before making it a Council matter. Therefore - what do you
30 > all think here?
31
32 I think the rough rule of thumb should be:
33
34 1. For stable keywords, we try really hard not to break anything. When
35 doing somewhat risky stuff, we drop keywords to ~arch. We generally try
36 to test stuff properly before things go stable.
37
38 2. For ~arch keywords, we don't guarantee things won't break but we also
39 don't break them deliberately. When doing very risky stuff, we use
40 masks or drop keywords entirely. Breakage can still sneak in.
41
42 3. For pure exp architectures, we don't guarantee any stability. We can
43 drop keywords or break depgraph.
44
45 --
46 Best regards,
47 Michał Górny