On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 16:16:53 +0400 Sergey Popov <pinkb...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >> And if you want to move stabilization checks to unqualified users, > >> then it is way to nowhere. > > > > No, because there would be much more users giving feedback. > > Feedback is good. But if it simple "works for me" without tests on > CFLAGS/LDFLAGS respect regression, cross-compile breakage regression > or any other regressions, than it is pointless. Sounds like Tinderbox covers those; so, it has a point for the rest. > I would suggest increase number of arch testers... Or, i repeat > myself(in infinite time), "recruit more people" That I agree with; but, will that be enough? > >>> So, recruiting in the terms of "finding recruits" appears to be > >>> hard. > >> > >> But, at my POV, it is only one way that we can improve current > >> situation. > > > > Sorry, I do not understand (language barrier), do you mean that 1) > > that should be the way to improve it or do you mean that 2) this is > > just one approach and that we should look at different ones? > > > > Yeah, my grammar sucks, i know. So, let's summarize what i mean. To > deal with our current problems with arches we have only two ways: > > 1) drop some arches to unstable -> lower the burden to arch teams; This didn't come up until recently; so, yes, that might work! :) > 2) recruit more arch testers/arch team members; Same point as before, let's see if that will be enough. -- 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
