Thanks all for the 'appreciation'. I'd like to remember that I'm not going away nor I'm retiring, I will just avoid to touch stabilizations, unless the stable package is part of my interest.
I'd like also to reminder that in the past I monitored the bugs via the
bugzilla UI, and in the recent past I used the getatoms script to monitor the
load for each arch:
for ARCH in alpha amd64 arm ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86
do
echo "${ARCH}"
python \
/root/getatoms.py \
-a "${ARCH}" \
--stablereq \
--no-depends \
--all-bugs > /dev/null 2>&1
grep "=" /etc/portage/package.keywords/test | wc -l
echo -ne "\n\n"
done
Actually we have a result like this:
alpha
82
amd64
99
arm
154
ia64
5
ppc
64
ppc64
64
sparc
20
x86
96
Actually the result is increased by the large number of packages in the
gstreamer stablereq.
I worked daily-by-daily for amd64/x86 and occasionally for an arch. I always
picked up the arch which have more bugs from the above list.
A always assured that there wasn't an arch with > 200 bugs.
Unfortunately I don't have time to work on the arch-specific. But if I can
help with 7 arches you shouldn't bother :)
On the other side, I respect and 'share' the point of view of the maintainer
which has some arch-specific bugs freezed with noone that take care of.
It is a fact that for those arches there are few users, so to improve the
situation we can:
1) Don't file keywordreq, since noone work on them. File directly stablereq.
2) Reduce the number of the stable packages on those arches
3) Make a more visible list( like a list here in term of
visibility:https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/output.html) of the
arches-dependent bugs so that everyone can contribute to maintain alive the
exotic arches.
If is not our interest to maintain those alive, just ignore my proposal.
--
Agostino Sarubbo
Gentoo Linux Developer
