| 1 |
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 07:31:10PM +1300, Alistair Bush wrote: |
| 2 |
> > On Saturday 27 of March 2010 21:58:41 William Hubbs wrote: |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > It's really freaking silly to wait months for stabilization of some random |
| 5 |
> > php/perl library that's known to work. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Have you ever just considered closing the stabilization bug and ignoring the |
| 8 |
> arch. If they take so long to mark your packages as stable why do you care |
| 9 |
> about them enough to even attempt to stabilize anything on their arch. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
If the pkg isn't a leaf node, you wind up keeping older and older |
| 12 |
versions lingering across multiple pkgs to keep it from breaking |
| 13 |
stable. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
This is assuming that it's still heavily frowned upon to remove the |
| 16 |
only stable version available for a non-dead arch... |
| 17 |
~harring |
Archives