This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Maintaining 2.12
- From: Matt Turner <mattst88 at gmail dot com>
- To: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at systemhalted dot org>
- Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Petr Baudis <pasky at suse dot cz>, roland at redhat dot com, schwab at redhat dot com, ams at gnu dot org, joseph at codesourcery dot com
- Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 22:02:51 -0400
- Subject: Re: Maintaining 2.12
- References: <20100513142934.GK16800@machine.or.cz> <firstname.lastname@example.org><AANLkTimWcxfbcgtrz3DjkuM95TMPfCM+wesRE6ZLNjemail@example.com><firstname.lastname@example.org> <AANLkTik=ZGhau5NGei_Ftg7svkFqvx_tjzbqBSegFqBC@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Carlos O'Donell
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Mike Frysinger <email@example.com> wrote:
>> On Thursday, August 05, 2010 10:58:25 Matt Turner wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Mike Frysinger <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> > On Monday, June 21, 2010 15:00:26 Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> >> so it looks like glibc-2.12 has been branched in git about a week ago.
>>> >> ?and it's been about 1.5 months since glibc-2.12 was tagged, and
>>> >> fortunately glibc- ports was tagged shortly there after.
>>> >> will the tarballs be packaged soon now ?
>>> > another month gone by ... are we going back to the system where distros
>>> > have to roll their own tarballs ?
>>> There are glibc-2.12.1 tarballs on ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/ as of Aug 3.
>>> Never saw any announcement though.
>> thanks, i hadnt noticed. ?ive updated the main arches to glibc-2.12.1 in
>> Gentoo, but now i just have to wait for someone to make a ports tarball ...
> Have we ever made any policy for ports?
> Should there be a role of "release manager" for ports releases,
> someone to herd the cats into getting "release ready?" Someone to spin
> a matching tarball?
> Speaking from experience, if I don't know the answer then it means we
> haven't talked about it enough, and we haven't done it enough times to
> remember what we're supposed to be doing.
Honestly, someone just make a damn tarball. Forget the policies.
They're clearly not working.
Let's look at the timeline
- May 03 - Ulrich tags glibc-2.12
- May 11 - Joseph tags glibc-ports-2.12
- Jul 27 - Andreas tags glibc-2.12.1
- Aug 03 - glibc-2.12.1 tarballs uploaded
- Aug 04 - Joseph tags glibc-ports-2.12.1
It's now Sept 09, and we still don't have glibc-ports-2.12.1 tarballs.
What's going on? Is each Linux distribution supposed to make their own
meta-distributions of glibc?
Seriously, can we forget about "who is supposed to do $x?" Someone
just do it already.