| 1 |
Stephen P. Becker wrote: |
| 2 |
> Starting a new thread here for a new angle... |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> As Stuart mentioned, bugs for any ebuild on o.g.o would go through |
| 5 |
> Gentoo bugzilla. |
| 6 |
Yeah, as there is usually a bug report for maintainer-wanted and |
| 7 |
maintainer-needed bugs it wont hurt anyone. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> It seems like genstef and jokey have completely |
| 10 |
> ignored support from arch teams for this overlay. What are you |
| 11 |
> proposing with respect to arch keywords and package.mask? |
| 12 |
users are supported to do everything themselves in the sunrise overlay. We |
| 13 |
are not trying to add any additional workload to your current one. We are |
| 14 |
in fact trying to make life easier for everyone. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> Do you |
| 17 |
> actually expect us to do anything but close assigned bugs for sunrice |
| 18 |
> ebuilds as WONTFIX? |
| 19 |
It is more like, explain the users how to fix it themselves, because they |
| 20 |
can with the sunrise overlay. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> Where else would these bugs go except for arch |
| 23 |
> teams, seeing as we clearly can't assign them to end users who |
| 24 |
> originally submitted the maintainer-wanted ebuilds? |
| 25 |
These are not expected to be filed as bugs, they should be fixed by the |
| 26 |
users in question. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
- Stefan |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives