| 1 |
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 12:35:31 -0700 Donnie Berkholz |
| 2 |
<spyderous@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
| Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 4 |
| > You'd have a really long list of maintenance architectures for me. |
| 5 |
| > Like I said, I don't use a single machine. The idea of *any* |
| 6 |
| > architecture being my "primary" one just doesn't really fit. |
| 7 |
| > There's also the simple fact that it doesn't matter *at all* what |
| 8 |
| > the maintainer runs it on, only whether or not (s)he considers it |
| 9 |
| > stable. |
| 10 |
| |
| 11 |
| There have been many cases where I've considered a package stable on |
| 12 |
| one architecture but not on another. How would I indicate this? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
This would be one of the cases where a maintainer / stable keyword |
| 15 |
would be inappropriate. I suspect there are a lot more of these than |
| 16 |
some people think... |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) |
| 20 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
| 21 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |
Archives