| 1 |
Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 05 Jan 2007 11:49:30 +0300, Robert Cernansky |
| 3 |
> <hslists2@××××××.sk> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 13:49:48 -0700 Steve Dibb <beandog@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>>> Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: |
| 8 |
>>> > Looking at the Portage tree, I see that some packages are kept ~x86 |
| 9 |
>>> > for long time without any bugs referenced in the changelog or |
| 10 |
>>> > Bugzilla. How are they being made stable (or where in the docs is the |
| 11 |
>>> > process described)? |
| 12 |
>>> They need to be in the tree for at least 30 days, no bugs, and if |
| 13 |
>>> someone files a stable request ebuild, then an arch tester will test it, |
| 14 |
>>> and then a dev will keyword it stable. |
| 15 |
>>> |
| 16 |
>>> Most stuff doesnt get marked stable mostly because there aren't any |
| 17 |
>>> stable requests. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> Stabilisation bug it not a requirement. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Actually, everything I said in that last email was a little off. Stabilization |
| 22 |
bugs are required because ultimately it is the architecture team that is going |
| 23 |
to mark it stable, not the developer. There are some cases where things can go |
| 24 |
directly stable (such as security vulnerabilities), but those are the exception |
| 25 |
and not the rule. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
So if you want something stable, do all the checks, file a bug, and copy all the |
| 28 |
arches that it applies to. You can see which ones use it on |
| 29 |
http://packages.gentoo.org/ |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Steve |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives