On 05/20/2016 05:38 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 05/20/2016 03:36 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote: >> On 05/19/2016 07:51 AM, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > > .. > >>> >> To make sure I understand what you're getting at, are you saying some >> devs get on board and then request to add keywords to packages that they >> already maintain? If said arches are already supported in Gentoo I see >> little problem with that, especially if they intend on being part of the >> arch testing team for that arch or have access to the hardware. > > Can you elaborate on your definition of supported in this case? does it > deviate from stable arches (alpha, amd64, arm, hppa, ia64, ppc, ppc64, > sparc, x86)?
I would say yes, if Gentoo has the manpower to maintain a stable branch for an arch, it's supported. How *well* it's supported is a separate concern and equally important. > >> >> But if this is a case of developers asking for arch keywords to be added >> for arches that aren't (yet) supported in Gentoo, I agree that we need >> some sort of formal requirements, much like we do for stabilization (30 >> days no bugs, etc). Covering it in the devmanual is a great idea. > > keywording for a new arch should normally only be done when necessary, > mainly if it is a direct dependency of another package. There is no need > to keywor it for an arch until it has been tested on that arch by some > user / developer ... certainly not because some committing developer > think it is nice to have all arches listed just in case. > > It is actually already [covered in the devmanual]; " It's important to > note that alternative arches (like alpha, ia64, s390, sh, sparc, hppa, > ppc*) are mainly undermanned arches, some of them are slow, they have > more basic problems and have a small userbase. Just file bugs for these > architectures when a package is going to be a dependency of a package > already keyworded. " Nice citation, I remember reading that last year. :) I agree: a new arch should have users and testing backing it up so it doesn't get added and later disappears or is left to sit and rot. As far as I understand, we have the arches that we do because there are developers and users willing to build it, submit bugs, and maintain it. New arches should be held to the same standard. > >> >> But adding keywords, as we know, comes with maintenance burden. New > > Indeed, more people should think of this. Adding packages in itself adds > maintenance burdens for other teams and the usefulness should be > considered accordingly before doing so > >> arches can't get supported without people active in the community and >> actually using the hardware. If that interest isn't there, why should we >> add the keywords to the main repo? Overlays may be a fine alternative. >> >> Just my 2ยข. Thanks for bringing this up, it's a topic I didn't know was >> a concern. >> > > References: > [covered in the devmanual] > https://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html > > > -- Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
