Grant Goodyear wrote:
Alin Nastac wrote: [Wed Mar 09 2005, 04:57:15PM CST]Not every time when I receive a new ebuild submittion, I also test that package because this is not always possible. Usually, I add the new ebuild with ~x86 and let testing to the user who request that. It may not be the orthodox way, but the risk of breaking something else in the process is 0 (a new ebuild means no other ebuilds depends on it).
Btw, what is the sense of ~arch if not "testing"? No gentooer expects from a ~arch ebuild to be stable, so the sky would not fall if you made a mistake and release it under this keyword. When I hear "I cannot mark foo library as ~arch because I don't know how to test it" smells like excuse to me.
*Sigh* The meaning of ~arch is that, at a minimum, the package works for the person who keyworded it (or, in some cases, worked for a trusted user on whose behalf the package was keyworded). In other words, the dev believes that the package works, and that belief is based on evidence, not just wishful thinking. An "arch" keyword means that there is considerable evidence that the package works for multiple people. Packages that might work, but also might not, ideally should not be in the tree at all, but could reasonably be package.mask'ed if testing is imminent.
Users don't usually come to me and say "that ebuild works for me". I take silence as a sign that everything works. I am sure I'm not the only one doing that.
I ask arches to mark a new ebuild as stable because a know bug have been solved or because the old stable version breaks something else.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
