On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Patrick Lauer <patr...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On 11/18/2015 01:01 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:12 AM, Alexander Berntsen <berna...@gentoo.org> >> wrote: >>> When I do QA in projects I'm involved with (at least outside of >>> Gentoo), we don't do it live on end-user systems. I'll leave the >>> details as an exercise for the Gentoo developer. >>> >> People who run ~arch are not really end-users - they're contributors >> who have volunteered to test packages. > Or people that use Gentoo because it allows them to satisfy requirements. >
So, again portage is a bit unusual in that it doesn't have an upstream outside of Gentoo. I think that a QA layer for Portage is a great idea, but it simply isn't going to happen unless somebody actually steps up to create one. The fact that more portage QA would be useful doesn't mean that the few volunteers working on portage should be banned from introducing new versions into ~arch until they create and staff a new QA effort. They're of course welcome to work on that if that is what they want to do, but I don't think anybody is going to try to dictate to them what they work on. If somebody really would benefit from more portage QA, I'd suggest either pitching in to do the work, or finding some way to entice others to do so. -- Rich
