On Sun, 07 May 2017 22:53:52 +0200 David Seifert <s...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> This is probably the smaller problem. The link shows a bug where none > of the aforementioned arch teams have keyworded the requested packages > in 4 months. How would the arches.desc proposal fix "dead arch teams"? > Sure, it will make maintenance easier for pure stablereqs, but the > other half of keywording does not happen. All the ia64/ppc/sparc > KEYWORDREQs I have filed for sci-* packages I have closed and > dekeyworded for revdeps. We have had KEYWORDREQs open for over a year > with 0 activity. If the keywording inactivity continues, I will also > continue to dekeyword packages I think its more "and" not "or", wherein arches.desc provides a pathway that makes dropping these profiles to exp less problematic. 1. Introduce arches.desc 2. Brand problem arches with the relevant flags 3. Drop problem arches to dev/exp That way we can still do some relevant keyword consistency checks while not holding back stable. Currently dropping arches to dev/exp tends to imply that *all* keywording consistency goes out the window into the EDONTCARE bucket, where the desired outcome may only be certain *types* of keywording consistency (namely: stable) is EDONTCARE but overall consistency (keywords being present) is still desired.
pgpg4FsxL0Jzw.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
