-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 02/04/14 03:28 PM, hasufell wrote: > I'm just not sure what any of the randomly filed stablereqs are > for. It doesn't help anyone, unless the guy who filed it actually > uses it or if it is a blocker for another stabilization. > > It's annoying me for some time now. I expect maintainers to keep > track of their packages and have a scheme when and what to > stabilize. > > So if you cannot provide any useful information, don't file > stablereqs. >
The idea, I believe, was that it's supposed to be a way for ensuring stable doesn't get too far behind ~arch, by pushing for stabilization automatically after a certain amount of time. It's an "opt-out" approach rather than the "opt-in" approach we have without such a system. Of course it does sort of have to be followed up with an auto-AT-CC after a certain amount of time too, for it to be effective. In general, i think the idea here makes some sense. However, it also makes sense that certain dev's work flows need to be taken into account (ie, certain or all of their packages are not auto-stabilized) and (as per the original post) sometimes multiple versions should go stable at once, in different slots. notes.txt or similar in the tree could help. I would also recommend (as i've brought up before) that anyone who doesn't mind other random dev's touching packages, should put a note here too (and vice versa, if said dev is adamant that nobody should touch their packages). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlM8yLEACgkQ2ugaI38ACPCXBgD/SaELIQSLsPHv8/FgryQlxPFp bc8VBveZbDPTc523rcYA/2MIAwocA44bdBmWylxkoHGep3JSjLb43Cy4CyUb3hIj =mehg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
