Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] call for agenda items -- council meeting 2017-09-10
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2017 18:37:28
Message-Id: 1504550242.1009.22.camel@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] call for agenda items -- council meeting 2017-09-10 by Rich Freeman
1 W dniu pon, 04.09.2017 o godzinie 14∶19 -0400, użytkownik Rich Freeman
2 napisał:
3 > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
4 > > W dniu pon, 04.09.2017 o godzinie 12∶48 -0500, użytkownik William Hubbs
5 > > napisał:
6 > > > On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 07:36:32PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
7 > > > > W dniu pon, 04.09.2017 o godzinie 19∶22 +0200, użytkownik David Seifert
8 > > > > napisał:
9 > > > > > Hi William,
10 > > > > >
11 > > > > > given the massive inactivity of the sparc and hppa arches, I would like
12 > > > > > to request dropping their profiles to 'dev'. I would like two votes:
13 > > > > >
14 > > > > > 1) Should sparc be dropped to a 'dev' profile?
15 > > > > >
16 > > > > > 2) Should hppa be dropped to a 'dev' profile?
17 > > > > >
18 > > > > > I hope this can clear a lot of the STABLEREQ and KEYWORDREQ backlog
19 > > > > > that is making maintenance in Gentoo cumbersome.
20 > > > > >
21 > > > >
22 > > > > Weren't we discussing moving them to ~arch? I don't like marking
23 > > > > profiles non-stable because it disables CI checks on pull requests, so
24 > > > > whatever people do with those keywords, we no longer verify it.
25 > > >
26 > > > Moving to dev means repoman doesn't scream about things, that's the
27 > > > cleaner way to go imo. Also, that means we don't have to go through the
28 > > > tree and change keywords everywhere.
29 > > >
30 > >
31 > > ...and that is a problem because...?
32 > >
33 >
34 > That is a change that is really hard to revert, while reversing the
35 > stable flag would not be nearly as hard if the arch team wants to step
36 > up. You don't immediately lose all the past stable testing work that
37 > was done on the arch.
38
39 Firstly, this is incorrect. There's no major difference between
40 restoring old stable keywords based on the state before their removal,
41 and restoring arch to stable. The only difference is that (a) may
42 involve a little more scripting, and in (b) some arch team members might
43 still stabilize stuff (possibly introducing even more hidden breakage).
44
45 > Long-term either approach yields the same result.
46
47 Given that at least hppa is long overdue on stabilizations, either
48 approach results in stable hppa breakage being introduced quickly.
49
50 > If marking the profile as dev causes some breakage for users, then
51 > those users should seriously consider contributing to the arch team,
52 > because they're probably the only people around who might potentially
53 > do so. If not, they get to keep the pieces.
54
55 ...or dumping Gentoo for a distribution that doesn't dump huge breakage
56 on users in week's time. Guess which one is more likely to happen.
57
58 If our purpose is just to show the middle finger to users, why not
59 remove the keyword altogether and stop pretending it's there when it
60 clearly isn't?
61
62 --
63 Best regards,
64 Michał Górny

Replies