List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
El jue, 24-11-2011 a las 12:12 -0500, Rich Freeman escribió:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Ian Stakenvicius <email@example.com> wrote:
> > .should ~arch packages with no maintainer really be moved to stable?*
> > (* assuming no other outside forces, like it's a dep of something else
> > that needs to go stable)
> I support stabilizing bug-free newer versions of maintainer-needed
> packages that already have stable versions. I'm not sure I'd extend
> that to stabilizing packages that have no stable versions already.
I agree with stabling newer version but NOT to stable maintainer-needed
packages that has no stable version currently :)
> I see getting stable users on the ~arch version as a win-win since it
> means less maintenance of older version (without a maintainer), and
> will likely give the stable user a more stable experience in reality
> than what they already have.
I have also seen some maintainer-needed packages need to get a newer
version stable to fix some old opened bugs
> Those benefits don't exist for a package that has no stable versions
> to begin with.
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part)