| 1 |
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 08:53 -0700, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 2 |
> I don't even see how this is a policy discussion at all as the policy is |
| 3 |
> more or less clear to me; is it unclear for others? This is an |
| 4 |
> enforcement problem, no? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
No. It *was* an enforcement problem. The problem has been resolved |
| 7 |
already. There's really no need for the Council to speak on this. |
| 8 |
Keyword policy applies to everyone. In the cases of certain games, such |
| 9 |
as Eternal Lands (thanks Roy!), we can make exceptions simply because of |
| 10 |
the necessity. That being said, there's nothing stopping games (or any |
| 11 |
maintainer) from filing a stabilization bug *immediately* after putting |
| 12 |
a package in the tree. I've done it on games a few times and I've seen |
| 13 |
it done on things like portage when a necessary fix needed to go out as |
| 14 |
quickly as possible. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
The point of policy is *not* to impede progress. It is supposed to be |
| 17 |
to provide our users the best quality distribution. If policy gets in |
| 18 |
the way of progress without gain for our users, then the policy needs to |
| 19 |
be revisited. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 23 |
Release Engineering Strategic Lead |
| 24 |
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams |
| 25 |
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee |
| 26 |
Gentoo Foundation |
Archives