On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 08:11 -0500, Stephen P. Becker wrote: > On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 01:35:32 +0000 > Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It is widely perceived that Gentoo has a huge problem with slacker > > archs cluttering up the tree and making maintainers' work harder. > > Clearly, something needs to be done about this. > > <snip> > > Wow, I almost don't know where to begin. The amount of FUD, > misinformation, and outright lies floating around all of this bullshit > is astounding.
<snip again> I'd like to chime in here, if I may, with some personal experience. I've been involved with arch keywording from both sides (being in the amd64 herd, and being the current gnome lead), and I have to say that it's definitely blown out of proportion. Yes, keyword bugs slip through the cracks. Some of my gnome keyword bugs hang around forever; sometimes, in my bug sweeps for amd64, I find keyword bugs that have been hanging around forever. It happens. However, there have been a number of cases recently for gnome where we wanted to punt old versions of gnome. We like to only keep 1-2 old versions around, so we remove whole sets of packages every 6-8 months. In this, we're probably close to unique. Many of these are newest keyworded versions on some arch or other. Generally, all the arches have been responsive to the problem, either by keywording newer versions, or by agreeing to drop keywords. Again, there's the odd case; but that seems to mostly be oversight. Summary: I don't see a real problem with any arch, mips included, either from the arch side or from the gnome side. There's more gnome cruft in the tree from us failing to clean intermediate versions up than there is from "slacker" arches. Daniel -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
