1 |
Hello, |
2 |
|
3 |
The Python team ends up filing a lot of keywordreqs due to new |
4 |
dependencies. Many of them end up open for many months, and start |
5 |
listing obsolete package versions. Then an arch team wakes up... |
6 |
and adds keywords to a version that's supposed to be removed already. |
7 |
Or complains that the package list is outdated. |
8 |
|
9 |
I think it's generally a reasonable assumption that keywordreq should be |
10 |
applied to the newest version of a package, unless the keywordreq |
11 |
explicitly says otherwise (in the comment). It's not helpful that |
12 |
stable-bot requires us to fill specific versions here. |
13 |
|
14 |
I don't think it's fair to expect package maintainers to keep package |
15 |
versions up-to-date in this case. I can take the blame if the package |
16 |
list becomes outdated, say, in 1 months. If the arch team can't keyword |
17 |
something in 6 months, I blame them, and I believe it should be their |
18 |
responsibility to update the keywordreq. |
19 |
|
20 |
Otherwise, we're creating a silly workflow where I keep putting |
21 |
an effort into keeping the keywordreq up-to-date, hoping that one day |
22 |
arch teams might actually act upon it. |
23 |
|
24 |
How can we improve this? |
25 |
|
26 |
-- |
27 |
Best regards, |
28 |
Michał Górny |