El mié, 21-08-2013 a las 18:08 +1000, Michael Palimaka escribió: > On 21/08/2013 17:54, Sergey Popov wrote: > > Why we should bring new half-stable, half-testing keyword for this? I > > think that this is no way to go. We should improve current situation > > with arches by some other ways(e.g., recruiting people). Maybe drop some > > damn-bad understaffed arches to unstable only(i do not point finger on > > anyone, they know, who they are... :-)) > > > I agree, I don't think adding a new keyword will help. I am also a big > fan of dropping understaffed archs to unstable (or if that is too much, > only keeping stable keywords for important system packages). >
I would also like to know concrete cases of packages lacking stable keywords on new enough versions. Maybe some of them comes from packages maintained by understaffed teams and, then, the solution would be different :/ Regarding the kernel... well, I don't think having a 3.8.x kernel as stable one is so old, what are current kernel versions in stable Fedora, OpenSuSE, Mageia... last time I checked we weren't so ahead on this (thanks to kernel team ;)) About Gnome, situation should improve soon, regarding KDE looks like we are OK. Also, with Phajdan Jr automated bug reports situation improved and, usually, the blocker is slow feedback from package maintainers in that bug reports. But once arches are CC, arch teams usually do the job really fast (specially thanks to Ago)
