| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Fri, 20 May 2005, Duncan Coutts wrote: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> Sorry folks this was my fault. I've sent my grovelling apology to the |
| 7 |
> sparc team. Hopefully they'll accept my apologies and put my digressions |
| 8 |
> down to me being a new dev. :-) |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
You can only take some of the credit Duncan, but not all of it :) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Every once and a while it seems a reminder such as this is needed as |
| 13 |
people tend to start playing with package keywords when they shouldn't be. |
| 14 |
It's kind of like guarding the cookie jar, you can't ever let your guard |
| 15 |
down, even if you cut off everyone else's hands. I try not to point |
| 16 |
fingers or name names since it's not something I like done to myself. I'd |
| 17 |
also like to think that this gives such guilty parties a better |
| 18 |
understanding of why the arch teams (and especially SPARC) can be so |
| 19 |
maniacal about this sometimes, in hopes that it will lessen and/or prevent |
| 20 |
this problem in the future. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
>From my perspective, if a package maintainer asks for testing and the |
| 23 |
ability to keyword (i.e. Spanky asking me if it was OK to bump binutils to |
| 24 |
2.16, to which I said yes) then that is fine. However adding or changing |
| 25 |
keywords in an ebuild for which you cannot test (regardless of how trivial |
| 26 |
the changes are or how "portable" the programming language of said package |
| 27 |
is supposed to be) is really where I'm looking at here. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
For some odd reason, trying to ensure QA (even in the nicest of fashions) |
| 30 |
seems to result in a majority of less than positive responses. Even |
| 31 |
recently I've had a developer get quite confrontational with me over email |
| 32 |
when I nicely asked him not to stabilize packages for which he could not |
| 33 |
test (even if the changes were supposedly trivial). History has shown |
| 34 |
that we cannot depend on assuming that trivial changes for me == works for |
| 35 |
you if we want to have some level of Q in QA. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Cheers, |
| 38 |
- -- |
| 39 |
Jason Wever |
| 40 |
Gentoo/Sparc Co-Team Lead |
| 41 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 42 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
iD8DBQFCjkP3dKvgdVioq28RAqw+AJ9yuqHTVZSsdnfyFt9PgJSm3jt+2QCdEjwE |
| 45 |
TS+flVWEr60GwuMEdWIqV/g= |
| 46 |
=xrIF |
| 47 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives