On nie, 2017-05-07 at 21:23 +0200, David Seifert wrote: > TL;DR > ia64/ppc/sparc teams are pretty much dead. They have been for a long > time and this won't change any time soon. Gentoo should focus its > resources on archs that are important and has the manpower to support. > Let us please drop these 3 archs to dev profiles to ease maintenance. > > Dear all, > I'd like to request Council to consider my motion to drop the > ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev (or exp). These arches are pretty much > dead, minus the automated workflows of ago. Two months ago I have > written to these 3 archs, and only received one reply from ppc agreeing > with my sentiment, with no response from ia64 or sparc, which in itself > is pretty telling. > > Currently, architecture projects think adding their keywords is a > right, which I strongly disagree with. I believe being able to add (and > stable) your keywords is a privilege - namely it carries with it the > duty to react to keywording and stabilization requests in a timely > manner. Let's compare the state of ia64/ppc/sparc to, say alpha: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=605278 > > alpha was keyworded within 6 hours. To date ia64/ppc/sparc are still > not keyworded (the bot had some breakages due to jer again shifting > around all the bugs). Within 4 months these arches have not managed to > keyword those 4 packages. This is I believe the most striking example > of how the only work done for these archs are ago's automated stablereq > scripts. Why do I saw that keywording+stabling your arch is a > privilege? Maintenance of packages is hampered by archs not stabling, > because we cannot clean up broken packages. Adding keywords is a two- > way street - if you don't act speedily, you're breaking part of the > maintainer-arch social contract. > > Please don't turn this into a massive bikeshedding contest and just > admit that it is extremely unlikely that these archs will see more > activity in the near future. We should focus our resources on more > important archs (arm64 maybe?) instead of these. I know you have that > old Mac G4 or UltraSPARC sitting in your closet that you're 2 days away > from installing Gentoo on, but the pain for maintainers and the rest of > the community is just too great. If someone steps up to do the work, we > can then move archs back to a stable profile, but so long as they > linger in their present state, let's call a spade a spade. > > Anyhow, I formally request the Council to vote on dropping these archs > to unstable/exp profiles for the next Council meeting, explicitly > overriding any arch concerns that are likely to awake now and going to > be running around like headless chicken. >
I'm against. Turning more arches into dev/exp only introduces hidden depgraph breakages. I think it'd be better if we looked into the arch.desc proposal and just disabled stable keywords for those architectures. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part