Robert Cernansky wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 13:49:48 -0700 Steve Dibb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrey Gerasimenko wrote:
Looking at the Portage tree, I see that some packages are kept ~x86
for long time without any bugs referenced in the changelog or
Bugzilla. How are they being made stable (or where in the docs is the
process described)?
They need to be in the tree for at least 30 days, no bugs, and if
someone files a stable request ebuild, then an arch tester will test it,
and then a dev will keyword it stable.
Most stuff doesnt get marked stable mostly because there aren't any
stable requests.
Stabilisation bug it not a requirement. Package should go to stable
after 30 days + no bugs even without stabilization bug.
No, it's not a requirement. It's a notice telling the developers that hey,
someone wants it marked stable. Plus, if a user / arch tester does the legwork
already of checking to make sure the dependencies are good to go, then we
appreciate the work and it creates less of a load for us.
I have an
impresion that developers are _waiting_ for stabilization bugs which
is wrong.
That's not true. But there's certainly enough work to go around that they can
get neglected.
I've raised a similar question few months ago. It's pretty long
discussion on -user and -dev:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/166565/
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/40719/
Good discussions, and my opinion is still the same -- that most packages are
assigned to herds, or unassigned to nobody, are minor things, and nobody is
directly looking after them. As a result they just plain get ignored.
In summary, no a stable bug is not needed, but if its a small less popular
package, it probably won't hit on anyones radar any other way.
Plus, I'm working on integrating some similar checks found in
http://gentoo.tamperd.net/stable/ into the GPNL website (
http://spaceparanoids.org/gentoo/gpnl/ ), so that we can again easily see how
long packges have been neglected.
Steve
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
