1 |
Ciaran McCreesh posted on Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:43:30 +0100 as excerpted: |
2 |
|
3 |
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:22:33 +0300 |
4 |
> Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> wrote: |
5 |
>> > Which does Gentoo care about more: slightly increased convenience for |
6 |
>> > most developers, or considerably increased inconvenience for users of |
7 |
>> > minority archs? |
8 |
>> > |
9 |
>> I don't follow you. Increased convenience just for the devs? How? |
10 |
> |
11 |
> Not having to keep old versions around for a few archs is slightly more |
12 |
> convenient for most people. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Having to deal with dropped keywords is a huge inconvenience for users |
15 |
> on minority archs. |
16 |
|
17 |
As already stated on the other sub-threads, that's not the point at all. |
18 |
Rather, it's a simple matter of letting an arch's stable tree dynamically |
19 |
and realistically adjust to the level of arch support they have. If the |
20 |
stable set gets small enough, it's probably time to officially reduce the |
21 |
arch status to testing tree support only, not security supported, etc. |
22 |
But well before that point, it's likely a core package set can be |
23 |
maintained at stable, with perhaps certain arch-usage specific area stable |
24 |
support as well, while still being unrealistic to try to keep a stable |
25 |
version of (nearly) all at-one-point-known-to-work packages available. |
26 |
|
27 |
If the arch support simply isn't there, it really is better to have that |
28 |
reflected in the size of the stable set, such that users actually know |
29 |
that and know what's being actively supported on their arch and what |
30 |
isn't, than to try to fake it, which is what's going on now. It's not a |
31 |
question of more convenience vs less, but of having arch keyword status |
32 |
reflect arch support reality. |
33 |
|
34 |
That said, if there's not already a simple way to get the info out of VCS |
35 |
(perhaps there is, I don't know), archs may wish to maintain a list of |
36 |
packages and versions that once were stable, along with comments on |
37 |
specific destabilization reason (it didn't work with gcc-vX on that arch, |
38 |
for instance) if known, so it'll be somewhat easier to expand stable |
39 |
coverage again if we happen to pickup a few new devs with a strong |
40 |
interest in the arch. |
41 |
|
42 |
-- |
43 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
44 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
45 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |