| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Our arch testers are understaffed and often don't really do general |
| 5 |
runtime tests (it's mostly assumed the maintainer knows about runtime |
| 6 |
issues). |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I have often had a hard time to get some random users comment on |
| 9 |
certain packages or even assist on some runtime tests. I don't even |
| 10 |
know how many people use the package I maintain. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
This makes it very difficult on some decisions when to stabilize |
| 13 |
non-trivial stuff like media-gfx/blender or |
| 14 |
sci-visualization/paraview. I don't use those things on a daily basis. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I'm wondering if it would make any sense to set up some kind of portal |
| 17 |
to track at least such delicate packages where we need users to |
| 18 |
comment on general stability and especially runtime issues. (actually |
| 19 |
the bug-tracker was meant for that, but it seems that doesn't work out |
| 20 |
for general user reports... those are very rare) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
So when any1 of you is really bored, he could chime in there, do some |
| 23 |
random testing (or maybe you already use it on a daily basis...) and |
| 24 |
report it. It wouldn't really need to be professional. |
| 25 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 26 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) |
| 27 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSf5pdAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzyFwH/0lvhLwyupLPvT+7iSgbXuTK |
| 30 |
1MsHNZRnWGYqBqOtkJqx6B5QN3dG+od7YlFm7Z3wgyB1RShw1OYGIzTwQhVCcTdP |
| 31 |
lwtHjgr2lD4ER7bYxvOeP7PVz+SYPGG1WO4N/ITktHUYoO/n7m0Mvtd8EnpDDQ30 |
| 32 |
T0YZn7333JvCxLwVJJLvp63FqUUkDmL4VKT5QHLvDhK8okgvXcIiSNUhvO17T2/7 |
| 33 |
mRi4K5NsOSHinnQt0ziUQxGYgq9StqM6aDcmzvHiV0g0NmegAGQEAcFnVVZWcYUI |
| 34 |
Rv8DThMzkbJhOFrFBCvJLOYdTGNTs9AdfQLSCtrd6O2rmUTlwiBl9jZntSUPPq0= |
| 35 |
=/S73 |
| 36 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives