| 1 |
foser wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 11:07 -0500, Stephen P. Becker wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>>Did we ever officially set up the x86 arch team, or is that not going to |
| 5 |
>>be done? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Again the arch team, as long as maintainership for packages is on x86 |
| 9 |
> arch, such a team shouldn't touch packages. Maintainers stabilize first, |
| 10 |
> only then arches. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Too bad the last discussion on this issue remained in limbo, we should |
| 13 |
> try and get some consensus going here on how to deal with this. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> - foser |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Which is why there should be a maintainer flag in metadata that states |
| 19 |
whether a package is maintained or not, and if so, what arches the |
| 20 |
maintainer has access to for testing. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Seeing as arch maintainers should generally coordinate with package |
| 23 |
maintainers anyway, I don't see what the issue is here. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Steve |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives