1 |
Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
>On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 12:25 -0400, Luis F. Araujo wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> |
6 |
>>Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> |
9 |
>> |
10 |
>>>On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 22:46 +0200, Simon Stelling wrote: |
11 |
>>> |
12 |
>>> |
13 |
>>> |
14 |
>>> |
15 |
>>>>Stuart Herbert wrote: |
16 |
>>>> |
17 |
>>>> |
18 |
>>>> |
19 |
>>>> |
20 |
>>>>>I've no personal problem with arch teams sometimes needing to do their |
21 |
>>>>>own thing, provided it's confined to a specific class of package. |
22 |
>>>>>Outside of the core packages required to boot & maintain a platform, |
23 |
>>>>>when is there ever a need for arch maintainers to decide that they know |
24 |
>>>>>better than package maintainers? |
25 |
>>>>> |
26 |
>>>>> |
27 |
>>>>> |
28 |
>>>>> |
29 |
>>>>I assume you're talking of the case where arch team and maintainer's arch are |
30 |
>>>>the same. I think normally package maintainers can decide better whether their |
31 |
>>>>package should go stable on their arch than an arch team, as they get all the |
32 |
>>>>bugs for it. On the other hand, we can't define a "maintainer arch" in many |
33 |
>>>>cases, so either we leave the authority to the arch team or we'll just have an |
34 |
>>>>x86 arch team without the expected effects. |
35 |
>>>> |
36 |
>>>> |
37 |
>>>> |
38 |
>>>> |
39 |
>>>I still think that the concept of a "maintainer arch" is completely |
40 |
>>>broken anyway. I like the idea of adding something like a "maint" |
41 |
>>>KEYWORD, or something similar to mark that the ebuild is considered |
42 |
>>>"stable" material by the maintainer. |
43 |
>>> |
44 |
>>> |
45 |
>>> |
46 |
>>This keyword would be independent of any arch right? |
47 |
>> |
48 |
>> |
49 |
> |
50 |
>Correct. |
51 |
> |
52 |
>It would be a KEYWORD or some other variable that says "I'm the |
53 |
>maintainer, and I say it is ready to go stable" without relying on any |
54 |
>particular architecture to be an indicator of stability. |
55 |
> |
56 |
> |
57 |
> |
58 |
Perfect, i _highly_ agree with the idea then. |
59 |
-- |
60 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |