Alex Xu wrote: > >>> Maybe it would make sense to automatically stabilize every v-s kernel > >>> right away? > >> > >> As has been stated, this implies that Gentoo QA has tested the packages > >> and found them to be reasonably safe for use. > > .. > >> Although stable kernels *have* been tested by many people before use, > >> Gentoo QA has *not* (officially) tested them, at least not on every > >> architecture. > > > > I don't think that matters. > > If you don't care too much for Gentoo QA
The point is that when arch teams find that they can not keep up with the pace of upstream and choose never to attempt stabilize v-s then clearly Gentoo QA will also not be able to keep up with that pace and thus Gentoo QA becomes irrelevant for the particular package. There will never be Gentoo QA on v-s. The original post also mentioned that generally v-s has more fixes than anything coming from stabilization efforts. It seems that for this package Gentoo QA can not realistically add any value to this package, hence my suggestion not to pretend that they can, and just remove the distinction between ~arch and arch for v-s, and make the latest version available to users by default. > >> On a technical level, it's not that hard to put > >> "sys-kernel/vanilla-sources" in your package.accept_keywords. > > > > But why should Gentoo users have to do that in order to use v-s? > > So they acknowledge that vanilla-sources has not been officially tested > by Gentoo QA. Since v-s is a special case that Gentoo QA is known not to handle, this overhead seems completely unneccessary to me. And the usability is of course poor. > > If it is intentional to push g-s onto users then it makes good sense .. > I can't comment on that. I guess this is really the pivotal point. If Gentoo prefers to push g-s rather than v-s then adding overhead for v-s kernels is fine. I'd prefer Gentoo to push v-s instead. //Peter
pgprinbDx2lyW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
