On Mon, 2014-01-27 at 09:52 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 2:41 AM, Steev Klimaszewski <st...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > It's not necessarily the STABLEREQs stopping, some of the issues are (at > > least on some arches!) that some of the unstable software doesn't quite > > work properly anymore, and we are failing at communicating. And in > > those cases, we on the arch teams should definitely be pointing this > > out, and filing bugs so that the issues can be sorted. > > Well, if the package or some version of it doesn't work at all, you > can always mask it on the arch or drop keywords. The arch team > doesn't need permission to do this stuff - the keywords and profiles > really "belong" to the arch team, and we just allow maintainers to do > their best job with them to make the job of the arch team easier. >
Right, but, afaik, an "unstable" ebuild can go away at any point in time, and then we'd be back in this same place - newer ebuilds are around, older working ones are gone... > Obviously if you actually want the problem fixed that requires > bugs/etc. But you don't need a bug to drop a keyword and at least > make it clear that the package doesn't work. > Right, and this goes as a point towards splitting out the arm keywords, and maybe I'll bring it up at the next ARM team meeting... I don't think it would get much traction, but I suppose it wouldn't hurt to at least throw it out there and see what sticks. > Rich >
