Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] making the stable tree more up-to-date
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 13:53:43
Message-Id: CAGfcS_mt9eefPZBb2=YRMagA0EEQYxmsQzZn8VM-k-Qy764oUg@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] making the stable tree more up-to-date by "Paweł Hajdan
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 8:27 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
<phajdan.jr@g.o> wrote:
> - people complain that a week-long timeout is too short, while after I > CC arches the answer often comes within minutes.
So, I agree with pretty-much everything you said, and I completely agree that stable-by-default, object-if-you-care is the right move. That said, there is probably room for debate over the length of time we leave the bug open. Maybe a week isn't quite long enough - maybe two weeks is better. Then again, if I as a maintainer had reservations I'd be very likely to at least post a comment within a week even if I couldn't actually resolve the issue decisively in that time. Rich

Replies

Subject Author
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] making the stable tree more up-to-date "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o>