| 1 |
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 17:54:33 -0600 |
| 2 |
Ryan Hill <dirtyepic.sk@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Kevin F. Quinn wrote: |
| 5 |
> > If you don't care whether a package is stable or not, just let the |
| 6 |
> > arch team go ahead and do what they need to do to stabilise when |
| 7 |
> > they wish to. The role of package maintainer has nothing to do with |
| 8 |
> > stabilisation, which is the preserve of the arch teams. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Um, sure it does. We're not going to stabilize something without |
| 11 |
> attempting to contact the maintainer first. If it's |
| 12 |
> maintainer-needed we'll just go ahead though. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Yeah; I meant that ebuild maintainers don't do stabilisation, the arch |
| 15 |
teams do, and that if the ebuild maintainer isn't interested in whether |
| 16 |
the package is stable or not, they can leave it for the arch team (and |
| 17 |
ATs) to do. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
Kevin F. Quinn |
Archives