| 1 |
Doesn't project forking begin to solve this challenge in collaboration? |
| 2 |
Add another root CVS directory, assign new or existing host/maintainer( |
| 3 |
s ) to that node and move on! |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
A project fork doesn't have to be an exact dircopy of an old branch of |
| 6 |
code, but can contain extracts. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Nick |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 11 |
> On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 19:50:11 +0100 Simon Stelling <blubb@g.o> |
| 12 |
> wrote: |
| 13 |
> | > * the package is actively maintained and herded in metadata.xml |
| 14 |
> | |
| 15 |
> | the bug is lying around for several months, |
| 16 |
> | |
| 17 |
> | > * the package maintainer is easily contactable by irc or email |
| 18 |
> | |
| 19 |
> | the package maintainer isn't on irc and did never comment the bug |
| 20 |
> | and your patch is only applyied on a specific arch which is CC'ed or |
| 21 |
> | even in the AssignedTo field of the bug? |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Didn't we decide that arch specific patches were a bad idea? |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> | Of course it's always better to ask first, but would it still be rude |
| 26 |
> | in such a case? What if a revbump isn't needed? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Naah, if the maintainer has vanished and there's no herd backing them up |
| 29 |
> (or the entire herd has vanished) then it's a whole different story. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives