Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!

Bug 829714

Summary: dev-perl/libwww-perl-6.580.0-r1: stable keyword reversion
Product: Gentoo Linux Reporter: Richard Freeman <rich0>
Component: StabilizationAssignee: Gentoo Perl team <perl>
Status: RESOLVED INVALID    
Severity: normal CC: sam
Priority: Normal    
Version: unspecified   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---

Description Richard Freeman gentoo-dev 2021-12-20 14:08:38 UTC
Commit 53144a5ba626da937a0a8387285f84bfbdf53b2c appears to have reverted stable keywords for dev-perl/libwww-perl-6.580.0

Based on what I can see in git I don't think this was intentional, so I'm raising this for awareness.  If the change is intentional then apologies for the bugspam though that probably should be mentioned in the commit message.
Comment 1 Andreas K. Hüttel archtester gentoo-dev 2021-12-20 18:10:23 UTC
(In reply to Richard Freeman from comment #0)
> Commit 53144a5ba626da937a0a8387285f84bfbdf53b2c appears to have reverted
> stable keywords for dev-perl/libwww-perl-6.580.0
> 
> Based on what I can see in git I don't think this was intentional, so I'm
> raising this for awareness.  If the change is intentional then apologies for
> the bugspam though that probably should be mentioned in the commit message.

That was actually correct, sorry. 

(580 was using the tarball of 550 so far, so real 580 was untested up to now. We should probably stable 600 soon.)
Comment 2 Sam James archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2021-12-20 22:50:56 UTC
Definitely intentional because, as explained in the commit message, it was using the wrong version. I can try be more descriptive in future though, sure, but you can clearly see it adds a Manifest entry which didn't even exist before (and git mv was used for a reason).
Comment 3 Sam James archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2021-12-20 22:52:14 UTC
(In reply to Sam James from comment #2)
> Definitely intentional because, as explained in the commit message, it was
> using the wrong version. I can try be more descriptive in future though,
> sure, but you can clearly see it adds a Manifest entry which didn't even
> exist before (and git mv was used for a reason).

(I also named the pkgcheck warning which could've been looked up ;))