| 1 |
On Friday 16 September 2005 00:20, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> actually this is came up in the meeting as something we would like to see |
| 3 |
> spelled out explicitly ... either as a GLEP itself or as a policy update to |
| 4 |
> current stabilization practices |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> the GLEP was approved on the grounds that we need an x86 team and that it |
| 7 |
> needs to be treated as any other arch ... arch team interaction with |
| 8 |
> maintainers should be spelled out clearly rather than part of a single |
| 9 |
> sentence '... or make individual arrangements with the x86 arch team.' |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Ok, I do think that we will need a way for the maintainer to indicate that the |
| 12 |
package is stable. I'd be happy to leave stabilizing out of my hands, but I |
| 13 |
wouldn't want my packages to be stabilized before I deem it stable. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Paul |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 19 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 20 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 21 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives