William Hubbs schrieb: > Thoughts? > > William > > [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/487332 > [2] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20130917-summary.txt >
I see 2 cases here: 1. specific or all arch teams allow maintainers to stabilize packages on their own, when they follow the arch team stabilization rules (e.g. having a system running with stable keywords for testing the package). This should not reduce the quality of the stable tree (or only to the small amount, that some arch testers do additional checks the maintainer does not do). Reading through this thread, it seems like amd64 and x86 arch teams already use this policy. This sounds like a reasonable agreement, so i am supporting this too. 2. for arches with no such agreement or where the maintainer does not have the needed hardware to test, no action for a certain amount of time usually means, that the arch team is overloaded with work so the only short- to mid-term solution is to reduce the amount of work resulting in smaller amount of stable packages. So i am voting for maintainers dropping stable keywords after a certain amount of time with no actions (maybe with some notice beforehand). This might result in a mixed arch user setup by default, but imho it is still better to have a smaller stable set of core packages and testing packages on top then having either everything on testing or broken/untested/unsupported packages, which are still claimed to be the opposite with the stable keyword. short summary: -in agreement with arch teams, following stabilization policy and having the needed hardware, maintainers should be able to add stable keywords themselves -if either agreement of arch team or needed hardware is missing, keywords should be dropped, so that after some time the workload matches the abilities of the arch team again. -- Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
