1 |
Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 17:43 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: |
3 |
>>> Say it with me. |
4 |
>>> |
5 |
>>> Herd == packages |
6 |
>>> Team == people |
7 |
>> There's no such thing like <team> in metadata.xml, that's what we've |
8 |
>> been talking about for ~1 day now. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> Maybe it's what you erroneously have been trying to say that I've been |
11 |
> saying, but it definitely isn't what "we" have been talking about. The |
12 |
> "team" is *implied* by the herd. If you email the alias for the herd, |
13 |
> you get the team. It really is that simple. |
14 |
|
15 |
Once again - the team is *only* implied by the herd if the team does |
16 |
_agree_ that the particular package in question should belong to the |
17 |
herd. If they don't, they it implies nothing. |
18 |
|
19 |
So, what we have been talking about is that you shouldn't encourage |
20 |
people to stick something into herd, like <herd>perl</herd> just because |
21 |
it's perl app (or to restate what you've mentioned, to stick |
22 |
<herd>games</herd> there just because it's a game. People won't like it, |
23 |
so don't force you games team practice on others, it's not how that |
24 |
mostly works outside of games herd/team. |
25 |
|
26 |
To quote ciaranm, since I obviously can't express myself the way you |
27 |
could understand: |
28 |
|
29 |
<quote> |
30 |
The issue is the old metastructure definition, which a) encourages |
31 |
dumping packages upon herds that don't want them and b) means you can't |
32 |
say "assign it to the vim herd". Which is rather annoying, because in |
33 |
practice the people that maintain a particular herd call themselves a |
34 |
herd, and the team / herd distinction is not usually made. |
35 |
</quote> |
36 |
|
37 |
> Let's look at this another way. There are a few packages which belong |
38 |
> to the livecd herd. There is no livecd team, there is just me. The |
39 |
> only person on the herd alias for livecd is me. That doesn't make *me* |
40 |
> the livecd herd. It makes the *packages* the livecd herd and *me* the |
41 |
> *maintainer*. |
42 |
|
43 |
And again, what's this distinction good for? Well, it's useless unless |
44 |
you are trying to enforce something like what you've suggested here |
45 |
before, i.e. |
46 |
|
47 |
<quote> |
48 |
I see nothing wrong with listing perl as the herd, *only* if |
49 |
they have themselves as the maintainer. |
50 |
</quote> |
51 |
|
52 |
Well of course it's wrong b/c people that don't give a damn about the |
53 |
thing you've just dumped on them will get the bugs! And will need to |
54 |
either remove themselves from metadata.xml or if they don't do it, will |
55 |
finally end up maintaining the thing once the guy who's kindly dumped it |
56 |
on them went MIA/retired. |
57 |
|
58 |
|
59 |
-- |
60 |
|
61 |
jakub |