Bug 343309 – app-portage/layman-1.4.1 stable request

• Status: RESOLVED FIXED
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Sebastian Pipping 2010-10-29 23:45:43 UTC]

If I'm not mistaken, bug #327491 is the only bug ever filed against layman 1.4.x. That bug has been fixed with the arrival of layman 1.4.1.

Please stabilize.

[Comment 1 Agostino Sarubbo 2010-10-30 14:52:04 UTC]

amd64 ok

[Comment 2 Markos Chandras (RETIRED) 2010-10-31 12:32:18 UTC]

amd64 done. Thanks Agostino

[Comment 3 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. (RETIRED) 2010-11-03 18:35:09 UTC]

x86 stable, closing

[Comment 4 Alex Buell 2011-01-03 14:48:23 UTC]

Can you please stabilise layman-1.4.1 on SPARC please? (Cc: to sparc devs added)

Tested on SPARC, and found to be working well with overlays.

[Comment 5 Sebastian Pipping 2011-01-03 15:19:10 UTC]

Re-opening for sparc...

[Comment 6 Michael Weber (RETIRED) 2011-01-04 01:01:46 UTC]

arm/sparc done, closing.

[Comment 7 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) 2011-04-08 03:36:16 UTC]

I don't understand what happened here. Many arches forgotten, reopening and assigning to maintainer(s) per metadata.xml

Keywords: layman-1.2.3[0]: alpha arm ia64 ppc ppc64 
Keywords: layman-1.3.3[0]: hppa 
Keywords: layman-1.3.4[0]: 
Keywords: layman-1.4.1[0]: amd64 sparc x86

[Comment 8 Sebastian Pipping 2011-04-08 16:24:18 UTC]

(In reply to comment #7)
> I don't understand what happened here.

I requested stabilization for mainstream arches only.
Afaik that is aligned with policies.

What should I have done instead and why?

[Comment 9 Tobias Klausmann (RETIRED) 2011-04-10 12:04:24 UTC]

Stable on alpha.

[Comment 10 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) 2011-04-11 20:47:12 UTC]

(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > I don't understand what happened here.
> 
> I requested stabilization for mainstream arches only.
> Afaik that is aligned with policies.

No. The policy is more to ensure that new arches aren't added to stablereqs for no reason. (Where 'no reason' means that there is no user interest)

> What should I have done instead and why?

When requesting a new version stable, it is advised that all arches that were previously marked stable are included. Else, you have this odd mix of some arches getting newer versions than some other arches within the stable tree.

[Comment 11 Michael Weber (RETIRED) 2011-04-11 23:58:41 UTC]

arm/ppc stable

[Comment 12 Sebastian Pipping 2011-04-12 00:36:38 UTC]

@darkside
Thanks for the explanation (comment #10).

[Comment 13 Raúl Porcel (RETIRED) 2011-04-16 15:55:54 UTC]

ia64 stable

[Comment 14 Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) 2011-04-17 18:26:27 UTC]

Stable for HPPA.

[Comment 15 Kacper Kowalik (Xarthisius) (RETIRED) 2011-07-09 11:23:46 UTC]

ppc64 stable, last arch closing