Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts?

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Markus Meier <maekke@g.o> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:03:30 +0200
> Agostino Sarubbo <ago@g.o> wrote:
>
>> On Monday 24 July 2017 22:22:23 Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
>> > 1. lack of automation
>> I'd summarize the techical steps into:
>> 1) get the list of packages
>> 2) test
>> 3) commit to git
>> 4) write on bugzilla
>>
>> 1 is done by getatoms https://github.com/kensington/bugbot
>> 2 is done by the tester in the manner he prefer
>> 3 no official tool available, I used a modified version of
>> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/arch-tools.git/tree/batch-stabilize.py
>> which is still based on CVS
>> 4 no official tool available, I used my own bash script which calls
>> pybugz
>>
>> So, points 3 and 4 needs to be improved, I have the idea on how the
>> script should look, but I have no time to do it and no python
>> knowledge. I can assist everyone that candidate itself to make the
>> tool/script like I did with kensington when he made getatoms.
>
> for 3 and 4 there's the keyword.sh script in my overlay (under scripts)
> that has been working for ages (at least for me)...
>

It is a slightly different process, but there is also the situation
where an arch is slow to respond to a stablereq and the maintainer
wishes to drop keywords.

In that case a script is needed which will remove stable keywords on
all reverse deps of the package.

Back when the council approved dropping keywords in these situations
it seemed to be that the effort required to do so was the main barrier
to maintainers taking advantage of the policy.  Awareness might be
another issue, as I don't think it really got documented outside of
the summaries.

-- 
Rich