Thanks all for the 'appreciation'. I'd like to remember that I'm not going away nor I'm retiring, I will just avoid to touch stabilizations, unless the stable package is part of my interest.
I'd like also to reminder that in the past I monitored the bugs via the bugzilla UI, and in the recent past I used the getatoms script to monitor the load for each arch: for ARCH in alpha amd64 arm ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86 do echo "${ARCH}" python \ /root/getatoms.py \ -a "${ARCH}" \ --stablereq \ --no-depends \ --all-bugs > /dev/null 2>&1 grep "=" /etc/portage/package.keywords/test | wc -l echo -ne "\n\n" done Actually we have a result like this: alpha 82 amd64 99 arm 154 ia64 5 ppc 64 ppc64 64 sparc 20 x86 96 Actually the result is increased by the large number of packages in the gstreamer stablereq. I worked daily-by-daily for amd64/x86 and occasionally for an arch. I always picked up the arch which have more bugs from the above list. A always assured that there wasn't an arch with > 200 bugs. Unfortunately I don't have time to work on the arch-specific. But if I can help with 7 arches you shouldn't bother :) On the other side, I respect and 'share' the point of view of the maintainer which has some arch-specific bugs freezed with noone that take care of. It is a fact that for those arches there are few users, so to improve the situation we can: 1) Don't file keywordreq, since noone work on them. File directly stablereq. 2) Reduce the number of the stable packages on those arches 3) Make a more visible list( like a list here in term of visibility:https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/output.html) of the arches-dependent bugs so that everyone can contribute to maintain alive the exotic arches. If is not our interest to maintain those alive, just ignore my proposal. -- Agostino Sarubbo Gentoo Linux Developer