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

[Hans de Graaff]

On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 11:03 +0200, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
>
> 1) Don't file keywordreq, since noone work on them. File directly
> stablereq.

This does not make sense to me.

If we want to go this route we should probably state a policy instead
that new dependencies for already keyworded packages automatically get
those keywords as well, even if untested. For packages with stable
keywords this would provide a chance to find issues before the package
is marked stable.

For KEYWORDREQ bugs we could also enlist our users. As a maintainer of
dev-ruby packages I'd be happy to add any keywords based on a "emerge
--info" and "build.log with FEATURES=test" combo added to a KEYWORDREQ
bug. Putting out a call for action and an easy way for users to scan
open KEYWORDREQ bugs for their arch might put a good dent in these.

Hans