| 1 |
On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 08:46 +0200, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: |
| 2 |
> If nobody on x86 is using a given package, is there a need to worry |
| 3 |
> > about marking it ~x86/x86? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> When I said 'All', I didn't mean to include stuff that's not in x86. |
| 6 |
> What I was trying to get at, was the idea that if the x86 arch team |
| 7 |
> is responsible for stable marking x86, then all packages that want |
| 8 |
> to go x86 need representation on the x86 arch team. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
No, they don't. That's the idea of an arch team. You don't section off |
| 11 |
everything *again* as we already have herds for that. Instead, if |
| 12 |
you're on the x86 arch team (or sparc, or mips or anything, really) than |
| 13 |
you are responsible for the x86 keyword. All of it. Every package. |
| 14 |
Now, while there might be some internal "Hey, I use this all the time, |
| 15 |
so I'll keep up with it" types of things, there's also the "I don't use |
| 16 |
this package but can test it when needed" area that needs to be kept |
| 17 |
track of. While fundamentally different, I would say the games team |
| 18 |
works similarly to this. We have *lots* of packages that we personally |
| 19 |
don't use, but we maintain. The arch teams do the same thing. They |
| 20 |
test what is requested of them, and determine if it is ready for |
| 21 |
stabilization, or even just ~arch keywording. Sometimes, they determine |
| 22 |
a patch is needed, and add it or send it to the package maintainer for |
| 23 |
inclusion. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 27 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager |
| 28 |
Games - Developer |
| 29 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives