| 1 |
On 6/14/06, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 22:34 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: |
| 3 |
> > > It's not irrelevant; you're just not reading it properly. You might |
| 4 |
> > > notice that metadata.xml contains tags other than <herd>, like, say, |
| 5 |
> > > <maintainer>. In the example that sparked this, <herd> is games and |
| 6 |
> > > <maintainer> the individual dev who maintains it. Simple enough, no? |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Please, go through the tree and see at least so many metadata.xml files |
| 9 |
> > as I have seen, before claiming something that simply doesn't reflect |
| 10 |
> > current practice. There are many ebuilds with no <maintainer> tag and |
| 11 |
> > <herd> only. Are you claiming that they are unmaintained? Well, that |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Nobody said that they were unmaintained. Again, why do people *insist* |
| 14 |
> on trying bullshit arguments like this? "Are you claiming.." No, he's |
| 15 |
> not claiming that, or he would have *said* that. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> > obviously doesn't match the reality. So, if they actually _are_ |
| 18 |
> > maintained by the relevant herd, then you shouldn't dump stuff on that |
| 19 |
> > herd without discussing it w/ them first. I'm pretty sure mcummings will |
| 20 |
> > gladly explain to you what will happen if you do, as well as a bunch of |
| 21 |
> > other devs... :P |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> A herd is a group of packages, not a listing of people. When you get |
| 24 |
> information from the herds.xml, you are getting the listing of the |
| 25 |
> people that *maintain* that herd. You are not getting a listing of the |
| 26 |
> people *in* the herd. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
According to the devmanual [1] |
| 29 |
"A herd is a collection of developers who maintain a collection of |
| 30 |
related packages" |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
are you sure you are using the correct term? |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
[1] http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/herds-and-projects/index.html |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> Please go back and read the herds project page[1] and try to understand |
| 37 |
> this. It really is printed quite simply. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> > To make it pretty clear and explicit - bugs gets assigned to |
| 41 |
> > <maintainer> (if there's any in metadata.xml), and get CCed to <herd> |
| 42 |
> > (if there's any in metadata.xml). If there's no <maintainer>, whoever is |
| 43 |
> > in <herd> will get that bug assigned and can happily smack you butt once |
| 44 |
> > they've find out you've dumped the package on them without their |
| 45 |
> > knowledge... That's how the large part of current ~600 dev-perl/* |
| 46 |
> > ebuilds has made it into the tree and that mistake doesn't need to be |
| 47 |
> > repeated. |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> You are correct. This is *exactly* how it works. Also, you'll notice |
| 50 |
> that nothing either I or Stephen has said contradicts this, if you |
| 51 |
> actually went back and contemplated what we both said. |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/metastructure/herds/ |
| 54 |
> |
| 55 |
> -- |
| 56 |
> Chris Gianelloni |
| 57 |
> Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
| 58 |
> x86 Architecture Team |
| 59 |
> Games - Developer |
| 60 |
> Gentoo Linux |
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
> |
| 63 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 64 |
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) |
| 65 |
> |
| 66 |
> iD8DBQBEkIGskT4lNIS36YERAlg2AKCmitk2Pwd7XSP+ysarJDc1imbnUgCgt2wv |
| 67 |
> OYJuhhIg+vG5wom7DRcwHEg= |
| 68 |
> =Tprl |
| 69 |
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 70 |
> |
| 71 |
> |
| 72 |
> |
| 73 |
-- |
| 74 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives