| 1 |
On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 19:17:09 +0200 |
| 2 |
Matthias Schwarzott <zzam@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Hi! |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> As the situation now has changed I would like to discuss this one |
| 7 |
> more. Since one week we (hd_brummy and me) have changed our Gentoo |
| 8 |
> VDR Project |
| 9 |
> (http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/desktop/video/vdr/index.xml) to an |
| 10 |
> official subproject of desktop/video. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Now the situation is as follows: |
| 13 |
> Most packages have historically either |
| 14 |
> a) one of us or |
| 15 |
> b) both as a maintainer |
| 16 |
> and the herd media-tv as fallback. |
| 17 |
> c) The newest ebuilds have herd media-tv and vdr@g.o (projects |
| 18 |
> mail-address) as maintainer. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> We now think that this should be unified. Our ideal would be having |
| 22 |
> the concept of a sub-herd. |
| 23 |
> The best realizable alternatives we can think of are: |
| 24 |
> c) herd media-tv and vdr@g.o (projects mail-address) as |
| 25 |
> maintainer. d) create an own herd vdr. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
A package can belong to more than one herd. So you could create a |
| 28 |
media-vdr herd, and have two herd tags in the metadata.xml for the vdr |
| 29 |
packages; media-tv and media-vdr (I suggest the media- prefix as it's |
| 30 |
not necessarily obvious what vdr means on its own). If you do this, |
| 31 |
make sure there's a maintainer tag. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
However (c) seems to be the most sensible approach. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> What do you think of that? |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> Zzam |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Kevin F. Quinn |
Archives