Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer stabilizations
On Thu, 08 Jan 2015, Michael Orlitzky wrote: I vaguely remember a discussion about maintainers stabilizing their own packages -- maybe just on x86 and amd64 -- to take the load off of the arch teams. Did that really happen or am I making it up? Is it written down anywhere? Sure it is. :) For amd64 it is documented in an e-mail to gentoo-core and a discussion in #gentoo-dev from 2007. I include both below. (kingtaco was the amd64 team lead at the time.) x86 has similar rules: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/89711 Ulrich | Message-ID: 473a496c.4020...@gentoo.org | From: Mike Doty kingt...@gentoo.org | To: Gentoo Core gentoo-c...@lists.gentoo.org | CC: am...@gentoo.org | Subject: [gentoo-core] AMD64 keywords | Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:03:40 -0800 | | All- | | Due to my failure to keep the amd64 team on track, I must now ask for your | help. We have 101 keywording bugs and 16 Security bugs, found at [1] and [2]. | It is simply too much work for me to do without holding up the release even more. | | If you are the maintainer of a package that currently has open bugs for amd64 | stabilization and own amd64 hardware, please do your own testing and keyword | your packages. | | I apologize for every late bug due to the amd64 team slacking off. | | Mike Doty | | [1] - http://tinyurl.com/2uanmp | [2] - http://tinyurl.com/3e2z56 | -- | gentoo-c...@gentoo.org mailing list ulm !herd amd64 jeeves ulm: (amd64) angelos, beandog, cardoe, chutzpah, cryos, dang, diox, dmwaters, hparker, kingtaco, kugelfang, malc, metalgod, philantrop, rbu, sekretarz, tester, tomk, trapni, voxus, welp, wolf31o2 ulm ^^ping kingtaco|work yes? ulm kingtaco|work: I'm about to file a stablereq bug for about 70 packages in app-emacs kingtaco|work gah ulm kingtaco|work: just wanted to ask how we should handle it kingtaco|work well kingtaco|work do you run stable amd64? ulm kingtaco|work: not regularly, but opfer and me have machines available ulm kingtaco|work: in principle this stuff should be arch-independent anyway kingtaco|work ulm, for something like this, there are 2 paths. you can file the bugs tracker like usual or, if you have a stable amd64 root using portage, I would allow you to keyword kingtaco|work I assume you're trying to make the snapshot? ulm kingtaco|work: at least for some of the packages it would be nice ulm it's mostly a matter to synchronise amd64 with x86 kingtaco|work ulm, they would probably be low on the priority list of stuff to stabalize, so it sounds like it would be better to have the emacs herd do the keywording ulm kingtaco|work: the emacs team would prefer this, too ;) ulm kingtaco|work: but i'm going to open a bug for it anyway kingtaco|work ulm, ok, our requirements are a stable root and portage as the pkg manager kingtaco|work and yes, a bug so we all know what's going on is good phreak`` kingtaco|work: damn, I thought you accepted one of the alternatives * phreak`` runs phreak`` better fast I take it phreak`` :P hparker it's not like anyone uses emacs * hparker runs kingtaco|work phreak``, nope. I don't care if other devs use is for whatever, but for amd64 our package manager is portage phreak`` hparker: if taco ain't nobody ;) hparker phreak``: I know ;) kingtaco|work and yes, I'm an emacs wh0re phreak`` kingtaco|work: just messing with you :-) ulm kingtaco|work: in addition we have some 10 packages (in app-emacs, too) to be keyworded ~amd64. Same procedure for them, I assume? kingtaco|work ulm, jup kingtaco|work ulm, so long as it's not a system dep, I'm more than happy to let herds do the keywording pgpvuOknypIgT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer stabilizations
08.01.2015 20:15, Michael Orlitzky пишет: I vaguely remember a discussion about maintainers stabilizing their own packages -- maybe just on x86 and amd64 -- to take the load off of the arch teams. Did that really happen or am I making it up? Is it written down anywhere? amd64/x86 are major arches. They can be stabilized if package maintainer has appropriate hardware. Even without arch teams membership.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer stabilizations
On 01/08/2015 12:57 PM, Mikle Kolyada wrote: 08.01.2015 20:15, Michael Orlitzky пишет: I vaguely remember a discussion about maintainers stabilizing their own packages -- maybe just on x86 and amd64 -- to take the load off of the arch teams. Did that really happen or am I making it up? Is it written down anywhere? amd64/x86 are major arches. They can be stabilized if package maintainer has appropriate hardware. Even without arch teams membership. What's a major arch? The devmanual still says[0], Moving a package from ~arch to arch is done only by the relevant arch teams. According to [1] that section is no longer correct, but only x86 and amd64 are exceptions to the rule that used to be exceptions but then weren't anymore. I'm going to write a devmanual patch but don't want to sound like a lunatic. [0] http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/89711
Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer stabilizations
I'm going to write a devmanual patch but don't want to sound like a lunatic. Also, an informal definition on what is supposed to be appropriate hardware and userland (e.g. clean amd64 profile) and what are keywording best practices would be nice to have. (Alternatively a link to the respective arch team documentation - if such stuff exists.) Best, Matthias
Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer stabilizations
On 01/08/2015 01:42 PM, Matthias Maier wrote: I'm going to write a devmanual patch but don't want to sound like a lunatic. Also, an informal definition on what is supposed to be appropriate hardware and userland (e.g. clean amd64 profile) and what are keywording best practices would be nice to have. (Alternatively a link to the respective arch team documentation - if such stuff exists.) I found this after writing the patch: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=510198 We can move discussion there I think.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer stabilizations
08.01.2015 21:12, Michael Orlitzky пишет: On 01/08/2015 12:57 PM, Mikle Kolyada wrote: 08.01.2015 20:15, Michael Orlitzky пишет: I vaguely remember a discussion about maintainers stabilizing their own packages -- maybe just on x86 and amd64 -- to take the load off of the arch teams. Did that really happen or am I making it up? Is it written down anywhere? amd64/x86 are major arches. They can be stabilized if package maintainer has appropriate hardware. Even without arch teams membership. What's a major arch? The devmanual still says[0], Moving a package from ~arch to arch is done only by the relevant arch teams. According to [1] that section is no longer correct, but only x86 and amd64 are exceptions to the rule that used to be exceptions but then weren't anymore. I'm going to write a devmanual patch but don't want to sound like a lunatic. [0] http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/89711 Major arches are amd64 and x86, nothing more. There is a bug for it already [1] [1] - https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=510198
Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer stabilizations
On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 22:00:16 +0300 Mikle Kolyada zlog...@gentoo.org wrote: Major arches are amd64 and x86, nothing more. There is a bug for it already [1] Isn't x86 basically a dead legacy arch by now? -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
