Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unstabling a package
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:05:39
Message-Id: CAGfcS_=sOYp3Bi5YtjqXQ030O_ivfuX2sgg9nXCPx0r8kttMtg@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unstabling a package by Jeff Horelick
1 On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Jeff Horelick <jdhore@g.o> wrote:
2 > While i'm not willing to maintain mythtv myself (as I don't use it
3 > (anymore)) or join the herd, what about contacting upstream as they
4 > already have their own overlay [1] and see if they'd like to "proxy
5 > maintain" the official Gentoo packages, sort of.
6 >
7
8 We do generally coordinate with them, and per my blog I refer users
9 upstream if they want more bleeding-edge experiences. The upstream
10 overlay tends to be ahead in terms of releases, and the official
11 Gentoo ebuilds tend to be ahead in terms of formal QA compliance and
12 packaging-related bugs, deps, etc. We do share, however. The biggest
13 difference right now between the two is that the Gentoo ebuilds are no
14 longer using the eclass until we can get rid of 0.23 and update the
15 eclass.
16
17 I do plan to maintain a stable mythtv branch, whether in portage or in
18 an overlay regardless.
19
20 Rich