On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 22:01 -0700, Yury German wrote: > > On 5/10/17 12:40 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > > On 5/10/17 3:29 PM, David Seifert wrote: > > So let's make sure we're on the same page -- here's my > > understanding. > > > > 1) For @system packages, we will have KEYWORDS="ppc" for the stable > > versions and KEYWORDS="~ppc" for the rest. > > So is this only for PPC or PPC64 as well? > Both are security supported arches, but if you are going this route > they > will be dropped to non-secured arches leaving: > > alpha, amd64, hppa, x86. > > > > > 2) For non @system packages we will remove both ppc and ~ppc > > keywords. > > > > 3) If for some reason I need to add back a package to > > build/maintain > > stage3/4, I will rekeyword myself, but other than that, we will > > *not* > > balloon the keywords. > > > > 4) I will take on the responsibility of stabilizing ppc @system > > packages > > if need be. > > > > So just to be clear, any developer can rekeyword a package to ~ppc? > >
1. ppc(= 32 bit) will be massively dekeyworded, ppc64 will stay unchanged (also given that it is an active arch in general and gets CPU upgrades from IBM/OpenPOWER). 2. In general, no. The proposal will be such that keywording should only be done to aid bootstrapping, not randomly add packages you think might be nice. The whole point of this exercise is to not have to repeat this whole thing again in 2 years, just because someone found a bunch of packages interesting. If there really is a dedicated team up to the task and demonstrably active in keywording/stablereq'ing, we can reconsider.
