On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 15:19:59 -0400 Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Tom Wijsman <tom...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > > > > A test of a package to determine whether it appears to be working > > OK or whether it destructs your system isn't too much asked for; if > > it works it can then be ~arch tested, if it breaks you have a bug # > > for p.mask. > > > > If someone can't test it at all, why was it added in the first > > place? > > So that it can be tested? Maybe the maintainer doesn't have the > ability to test the package (might require special hardware). Maybe > the maintainer doesn't have the time to test it right away, but wants > to allow others to do so (especially if others show an interest). That is an edge case; it's somewhat hard to maintain a package if you can't test it, and there are occasions (eg. Amazon EC2 related packages) where this is indeed needed. I don't see a need to introduce that masked though; but again, it depends on how edgy it is... > Sure, I can set up yet another overlay, which will be empty 99% of the > time. But, what is the harm in just using a mask? I've yet to leave > one sitting around for years (well, not for testing at least). No problem with that if it is for a safe introduction, although I'm not quite sure how much that really invites actual testing; however it's not about that, everything that stays longer forms the problem. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
