1 |
Hi all, |
2 |
|
3 |
I agree here. If there is a maintainer for an ebuild, anyone who wants another version of the ebuild in the system should be able to send it to the maintainer for the ebuild or file a bug that should be assigned to the maintainer. Otherwise things would get really confusing. |
4 |
|
5 |
William |
6 |
|
7 |
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 06:14:31PM +0200, Tony Clark wrote: |
8 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
9 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
10 |
> |
11 |
> On Tuesday 22 April 2003 18.00, Klavs Klavsen wrote: |
12 |
> > On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 16:57, Peter Ruskin wrote: |
13 |
> > > On Tuesday 22 Apr 2003 15:26, Dan Armak wrote: |
14 |
> > > > The second will facilitate quick acceptance of user-submitted ebuilds |
15 |
> > > > in some way - probably drawing upon the submitters in one way or |
16 |
> > > > another. |
17 |
> > > |
18 |
> > > I'm more than willing to maintain ebuilds I submit. |
19 |
> > |
20 |
> > Same here. What are the requirements for being a maintainer? |
21 |
> > I don't think one has to make the newest version available ASAP. |
22 |
> > This f.ex. didn't happen with drip - which was why I created a new |
23 |
> > version myself. |
24 |
> > |
25 |
> > I think people who submit ebuilds should automacally be added as |
26 |
> > maintainer of the ebuild. If they contribute with a newer version of a |
27 |
> > given ebuild - then they should be added as maintainer - keeping the old |
28 |
> > maintainer too. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> Not too sure I agree with this. You need people to take some sort of |
31 |
> ownership of the problem. If things don't get done then you can look at |
32 |
> replacing them. |
33 |
|
34 |
|
35 |
-- |
36 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |