Re: [gentoo-dev] Unstabling a package
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Jeff Horelick wrote: > While i'm not willing to maintain mythtv myself (as I don't use it > (anymore)) or join the herd, what about contacting upstream as they > already have their own overlay [1] and see if they'd like to "proxy > maintain" the official Gentoo packages, sort of. > We do generally coordinate with them, and per my blog I refer users upstream if they want more bleeding-edge experiences. The upstream overlay tends to be ahead in terms of releases, and the official Gentoo ebuilds tend to be ahead in terms of formal QA compliance and packaging-related bugs, deps, etc. We do share, however. The biggest difference right now between the two is that the Gentoo ebuilds are no longer using the eclass until we can get rid of 0.23 and update the eclass. I do plan to maintain a stable mythtv branch, whether in portage or in an overlay regardless. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Unstabling a package
On 19 February 2012 21:46, Doug Goldstein wrote: > Any specific procedure to unstable a package? Specifically MythTV. > While there's a lot of user interest in the package, there's just not > enough dev help with the package to really keep it up to snuff to what > could be considered stable. Its woefully behind and I'd just be > happier to drop the current stable and bump everything as unstable. > > -- > Doug Goldstein > While i'm not willing to maintain mythtv myself (as I don't use it (anymore)) or join the herd, what about contacting upstream as they already have their own overlay [1] and see if they'd like to "proxy maintain" the official Gentoo packages, sort of. [1] https://github.com/MythTV/packaging/tree/master/Gentoo JD
Re: [gentoo-dev] Unstabling a package
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Doug Goldstein wrote: > Any specific procedure to unstable a package? Specifically MythTV. > While there's a lot of user interest in the package, there's just not > enough dev help with the package to really keep it up to snuff to what > could be considered stable. Its woefully behind... The current unstable package for mythtv was the upstream stable version only a few weeks ago. I was contemplating stabilizing it, although with 0.24.2 out it might make more sense to target that version. The current stable version should certainly be removed ASAP - it contains numerous bugs and some QA issues that have been fixed in the unstable version. The only thing the stable version has going for it is support for more plugins. If I get a long weekend I might try upgrading to 0.24.2 and getting that into portage (assuming nobody else beats me to it). Unfortunately my only mythtv system is essentially a production system, so I can't really have it down for any length of time. If we do make mythtv unstable I'd prefer that we not drop versions too quickly. If somebody else is able to keep up with the bleeding-edge versions more power to them, but if the consensus is that the older versions have to go most likely I'd just start maintaining my own overlay and abandon the one in portage. I can really only do a serious version bump maybe 2-3 times per year at most. I'm not convinced that going completely unstable is really going to solve anything, however. I'd rather have a core of stable functionality than something bleeding-edge for something like mythtv. Then again, that might just be personal preference. Rich
[gentoo-dev] Unstabling a package
Any specific procedure to unstable a package? Specifically MythTV. While there's a lot of user interest in the package, there's just not enough dev help with the package to really keep it up to snuff to what could be considered stable. Its woefully behind and I'd just be happier to drop the current stable and bump everything as unstable. -- Doug Goldstein
