On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 01:20:29PM +0100, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > On 1/25/11 12:38 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > > Every arch teams should stabilise OR write out reason why they can't do > > so to stable bug in 90 days. If any arch team fails to do so the > > maintainer can decide to drop their keywords to testing. Given depgraph > > breakages the maintainer can coordinate with the QA team to drop all > > reverse dependencies to testing too. > > Seconded. Reality++ > > Be prepared for some issues though. Sometimes maintainers don't agree > with reasons arch teams provide that block stabilizations. In those > cases, who makes the decision? My suggestion is QA. QA is not a solution to everything. The problem Tomas is trying to counter here is the idle/slacking arches. If the arch is active but have some concerns regarding the stabilization then let the maintainer deal with it. This is the way we do it now anyway > > Also, we should have someone to check for stale stabilization bugs. I'm > not sure if all reporters are able to take care of that, especially if > they have a lot of bugs open. > > Paweł > Thats really their problem. Arches can always remove themselves from the bugs. No need to care about stale bugs. If the maintainers don't care then we(arches) don't care.
Regards, -- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Key ID: B4AFF2C2 Key FP: 660A 0742 84EC 26F1 9EDB F00A FA83 5A15 B4AF F2C2
pgpctzIsQqDcN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
