On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 17/07/14 02:28 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: >> El jue, 17-07-2014 a las 17:03 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió: >>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2014 10:23:20 -0400 Rich Freeman >>> <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>>> I think that sticking KEYWORDS in an eclass is something that >>>> should probably never happen. >>> >>> It used to be banned by PMS, for other reasons... >>> >> >> I have just found this: >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=342185 >> >> Then, looks like they are refusing to change it :( >> > > OK, so, we're back to the complicated option -- a different set of > KEYWORDS for each class of RELEASE (ie, RELEASE=true, RELEASE=false, > or a new RELEASE=in-progress); ebuilds are set to in-progress for the > particular set that are being stabilized, and KEYWORDS are adjusted in > the eclass. > > I guess we'll have to wait until vapier's back to get it done, tho.. >
No, we can still choose to ban this practice. Is there a good reason to do it this way? A REALLY good reason? If not, I suggest we make policy to prohibit this, and only allow it in circumstances TBD (the Council can consider them if somebody actually comes up with one). I agree that it isn't a PMS issue - it is a tree quality issue. PMS doesn't prohibit introducing packages straight to stable, dropping stable packages, etc. These are all tree quality issues and a matter of policy. Rich
