El sáb, 11-04-2015 a las 21:50 +0200, Andreas K. Huettel escribió:
> Hi all,
>
> the debate about arches, keywording and stabilization procedures is coming up
> again.
>
> People have told me that the whole debate seems to turn into some sort of
> arch-team bashing. That is definitely not the plan. Also, supporting many
> different types of hardware is actually one of the strong points of Gentoo.
>
> So, it would be absolutely great to have more feedback from the arch teams,
> especially suggestions
> * how to improve procedures,
> * where you see the main problems, and
> * where you don't see problems...
>
> Please make your voice heard. Noone wants to overrule an active team.
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>
> PS. I've ommitted amd64, hppa, and arm from the manual CC list because these
> are the stable arches I'm definitely not worried about. Obviously feedback is
> appreciated anyway.
>
>
>
>
Currently, a problem is that everybody uses different formatting
for stabilization bug reports making them more difficult to be parsed.
One option could be to change the way bugs are filled when "Keyword &
Stabilization" component is chosen. When that is the case, instead of
letting people to play with "Summary" field freely, people would only be
able to specify package atoms to be stabilized and, once supplied,
bugzilla would take care of reworking the summary to something like:
=${P}: stable request -> for the cases where only 1 package is supplied
=${P}, =${P1}: stable request -> when a few packages are supplied
separated by commas
BLABLABLA list stable request -> when reporter chooses (with a
checkbox... or KEYWORD or... :/) that they are going to attach a full
list for stabilizing (as this cases need to be treated in a completely
different way
Is this technically possible?
