From 7fcec4cee3430765eb3563c6d5a5f7aceb6a84f5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Micha=C5=82=20G=C3=B3rny?= <mgorny@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2020 08:17:58 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Rekeywording & stabilization rules MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Signed-off-by: Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> --- keywords.rst | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+) diff --git a/keywords.rst b/keywords.rst index 5dcbc77..272dca4 100644 --- a/keywords.rst +++ b/keywords.rst @@ -1,6 +1,51 @@ Keywording and stabilization ============================ +.. index:: keywords; rekeywording + +Rekeywording on dropped keywords +-------------------------------- +:Source: QA +:Reported: by pkgcheck and repoman + +The developer removing keywords from a package (e.g. due to new +dependencies) must file a rekeywording bug asking for the package being +retested. This rule can be exempted if the package is known not to work +(anymore) on the arch in question. + +*Rationale*: rekeywording on minor architectures often takes a long +time. If a developer neglects to request it immediately, it negatively +affects other developers who in the future either want to stabilize +a new version or to remove an old version. + + +.. index:: keywords; stabilizing new versions + +Stabilizing new versions +------------------------ +:Source: QA +:Reported: by pkgcheck + +Whenever requesting a stabilization of a new version of the package, +the developer must CC *all* arches that had at least one previous stable +version of the package in question, and that still have ~arch keywords +in the stabilized version. This applies to experimental architectures +as well. + +The stabilization request can be closed and old stable version removed +once all non-experimental architectures have processed the stabilization +request. However, the remaining arch teams should be kept CC-ed in case +they wanted to process the bug. + +*Rationale*: there were some cases of developers requesting +stabilization only of a subset of architectures they were personally +interested in. This meant some other developer had to independently +request stabilization on remaining architectures which only meant +a duplication of effort and unnecessary confusion over which version +is stable and whether arch teams are slacking or stabilization was not +requested on remaining architectures in the first place. + + .. index:: keywords; removing stable Removing stable keywords