Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: stabilization policies
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 21:05:19
Message-Id: 20130820230513.25c056ff@TOMWIJ-GENTOO
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: stabilization policies by hasufell
1 On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 22:16:34 +0200
2 hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > On 08/20/2013 08:19 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
5 > >
6 > > My question is, how can we improve our stabilization
7 > > procedures/policies so we can convince people not to run production
8 > > servers on ~arch and keep the stable tree more up to date?
9 > >
10 >
11 > Why convince them? They have been warned and it's their own problem.
12 >
13 > I don't see any BIG problem in our current stabilization procedure.
14 > Scripts for auto-filing stablereqs seem wrong to me. It's not just
15 > about "it was 30 days in the tree without a bug". The maintainer has
16 > to know about upstream bug reports and other crap that might be going
17 > on.
18 >
19 > Such things to speed up the procedure will only make it worse.
20
21 +1 at most it helps as a reminder to me; but indeed, a lot of these
22 reminders are false positive. What we really should do instead is look
23 for the worst offenders; in other words, which packages haven't been
24 stabilized for ages, which have a stable version of half a year ago?
25
26 See `imlate --mtime=180 -s | less`. (From app-portage/gentoolkit-dev)
27
28 I quote:
29
30 > ==============================================
31 > 4392 Stable candidates for 'gentoo' on 'amd64'
32 > ==============================================
33
34 Let's double the number to a year ago (360 instead of 180), I quote:
35
36 > ==============================================
37 > 2728 Stable candidates for 'gentoo' on 'amd64'
38 > ==============================================
39
40 And also get an impression of 3 months (90 instead of 180), I quote:
41
42 > ==============================================
43 > 6065 Stable candidates for 'gentoo' on 'amd64'
44 > ==============================================
45
46 At least the numbers for the year sound like something we will want to
47 deal with; from there, we could try to keep half a year low. And after
48 a while, we might end up ensuring stabilization within 3 months.
49
50 That's still three times more than our intended stabilization delay...
51
52 --
53 With kind regards,
54
55 Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
56 Gentoo Developer
57
58 E-mail address : TomWij@g.o
59 GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D
60 GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: stabilization policies Wyatt Epp <wyatt.epp@×××××.com>
[gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: stabilization policies Michael Palimaka <kensington@g.o>