| 1 |
Thilo Bangert wrote: |
| 2 |
> Doug Goldstein <cardoe@g.o> said: |
| 3 |
>> Thilo Bangert wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> All packages with <herd>maintainer-needed</herd> will be moved to |
| 5 |
>>> <herd>no-herd</herd>. |
| 6 |
>> maintainer-needed is different from no-herd. no-herd is valid when a |
| 7 |
>> dev is maintaining a pkg outside of a herd. no-herd is not valid for |
| 8 |
>> when the package is entirely unmaintained, maintainer-needed would be a |
| 9 |
>> better tag for it. I would not make that change. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> if that were so, we would need to document it. |
| 12 |
> from my reading of the current policies[1,2,3] <herd> is required and |
| 13 |
> either no-herd or in herds.xml, no-herd only being allowed if no herd |
| 14 |
> fits. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
This is where all the discussions died from last time, that I can tell. We |
| 17 |
never really decided on a specific policy change, and nothing got documented, or |
| 18 |
done. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
In the end, we still have a few ebuilds in the tree that have no maintainer or |
| 21 |
no herd, and nobody really cares since all the portage utilities work around it |
| 22 |
anyway. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Still, as a matter of QA, it'd be nice to fix. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Steve |
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives