1 |
В Втр, 11/10/2011 в 19:10 +0300, Samuli Suominen пишет: |
2 |
> > Samuli pretends here to act as a part of QA team (although he is not). |
3 |
> > Actually even whiteboard of stabilization bug tells #at _earliest_ 17 |
4 |
> > Oct" and thus there is really no sign for rush. This is the case where |
5 |
> > QA should voice and either explain why fast stabilization of libpng is |
6 |
> > so important or stop policy breakage. That said it became really common |
7 |
> > to break our own policies (with no attempts to amend policy). |
8 |
> |
9 |
> full stop. |
10 |
|
11 |
[snip history] |
12 |
|
13 |
> what does this has to with qa@ team? |
14 |
|
15 |
The only bodies that are allowed to avoid policies in Gentoo are QA and |
16 |
security teams. Since this issue has nothing to do with security the |
17 |
only option left is QA. |
18 |
|
19 |
> so no, you don't get to use this as anykind of weapon against me or |
20 |
> anyone else involved. |
21 |
|
22 |
Sorry, I never wanted to touch any weapons and I really appreciate your |
23 |
efforts. You really do tremendous job for Gentoo. But this is not the |
24 |
first thread where I ask you same question: what is the problem to |
25 |
follow policy? If it was a mistake what's the problem to sorry and |
26 |
update mask interval. If not... What will happen if you keep hard masked |
27 |
package for 30 days instead of 14? How this will affect libpng |
28 |
stabilization? The only thing that changes - we will have 56 |
29 |
non-development related mails less in our mailboxes. |
30 |
|
31 |
-- |
32 |
Peter. |