1 |
On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 23:06 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
2 |
> Earlier tonight, I discussed with halcy0n our differing opinions of the |
3 |
> need for modular X to enter ~arch and break trees for some ~arch users. |
4 |
> In my opinion, this is acceptable and beneficial, as ~arch users should |
5 |
> already be those willing to help out. It will assist in learning which |
6 |
> of the still-unported apps are actually in use and help compile a |
7 |
> possible list of tree removal candidates. halcy0n, on the other hand, |
8 |
> feels that any breakage of the ~arch tree is anathema. |
9 |
|
10 |
Funny enough, I kinda agree with both of you. I am currently working |
11 |
through the *enormous* number of packages in games-* but with the |
12 |
release forthcoming and also very busy. Any help here would be |
13 |
appreciated. I would hope to get as much of this done as possible |
14 |
*before* the packages go into ~arch, rather than after. |
15 |
|
16 |
> It's my earnest hope that this proposal makes everyone happy, because I |
17 |
> refuse to let modular X get old and rusty in package.mask while hundreds |
18 |
> of unmaintained (or undermaintained, for whatever reason) applications |
19 |
> hold it back. |
20 |
|
21 |
In our case, it is simply sheer numbers. We have a small group |
22 |
responsible for a large number of packages. We are definitely agreeable |
23 |
to getting some help with this, as we don't want to be the cause of |
24 |
holding back modular X in any way. |
25 |
|
26 |
-- |
27 |
Chris Gianelloni |
28 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
29 |
x86 Architecture Team |
30 |
Games - Developer |
31 |
Gentoo Linux |