1 |
В Вск, 28/03/2010 в 07:47 +0200, Maciej Mrozowski пишет: |
2 |
> No, seriously - given the fact that some of my packages were even stabilized |
3 |
> without contacting me (app-misc/hal-cups-utils, app-admin/system-config- |
4 |
> printer-common) |
5 |
|
6 |
If you know packages are broken why they were not hardmasked? If they |
7 |
have no problems what why it was bad idea to mark them stable? |
8 |
|
9 |
> * solely up to the package maintainers to stabilize application on arches |
10 |
> they're using or on any arch if package is arch-agnostic (optionally, but |
11 |
> preferably with some peer review from other project members or arch team |
12 |
> members). |
13 |
|
14 |
In general package maintainer should avoid to stabilize the packages he |
15 |
worked on as one of the arch team's goal was to have second eyes on |
16 |
package before it goes stable. |
17 |
|
18 |
> Role of arch teams would be decreased to peer review and solving KEYWORD |
19 |
> requests. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> It's really freaking silly to wait months for stabilization of some random |
22 |
> php/perl library that's known to work. |
23 |
|
24 |
Why wait? amd64 team requested help and every developer who tested |
25 |
package on stable profile is allowed to mark package stable. For rare |
26 |
archs it's possible configure search filters to avoid stabilization |
27 |
requests. |
28 |
|
29 |
-- |
30 |
Peter. |