1 |
2011/9/20 Tomáš Chvátal <scarabeus@g.o>: |
2 |
> The issue here is that if some part of the tree looses lots of its |
3 |
> maintainers we as devs usually manage to shape it up enough for us in |
4 |
> testing but nobody ever bothers to wait that 30 days and open |
5 |
> stablereq. |
6 |
|
7 |
An issue your suggestion doesn't address is when packages don't even |
8 |
stick around 30 days/etc. |
9 |
|
10 |
I know I've seen many packages where there is an ancient stable |
11 |
version that is never touched, and a much newer ~arch version that |
12 |
gets tweaked every 3-6 weeks. When it gets tweaked, often the old |
13 |
version is just removed immediately, or shortly after it is bumped. |
14 |
So, packages often don't stick around the 30 days it takes to |
15 |
stabilize them. |
16 |
|
17 |
Granted, this is a bit anecdotal so I can't speak for how big a |
18 |
problem this is in reality. However, for any stabilization scheme to |
19 |
work packages have to be, well, stable. :) |
20 |
|
21 |
Rich |