List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On 10/08/2011 06:13 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 08-10-2011 11:05:08 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> If the extra 16 days will actually accomplish something beyond just
>> delaying libpng then we can debate the finer points of policy.
>> However, if we're just arguing policy for its own sake then I don't
>> see the value. Perhaps a package maintainer might have the "right" to
>> a few weeks to fix things, but in the end you have to put the distro
>> and its users first. You can do that either by speaking up or
>> standing aside, but if you're going to speak up, then make sure you
>> can follow through.
> It seems to me like you say here that any policy that Gentoo has that
> you just don't like can be ignored because, well, you just don't like
> We can discuss whether or not the policy is ok, but should we ignore the
> policy for that reason? I think not.
It's not like fastened lastriting hasn't happened before. I question
your motives in picking this particular one. It's not like I expected
cookies for the time I've put into this porting effort, but not this