1 |
On Sat, May 10, 2003 at 07:20:19PM -0700, Arthur Britto wrote: |
2 |
> That's nice, but I've been tracking an ebuild submission (bug #8997) |
3 |
> since October. |
4 |
> |
5 |
> How many months should someone expect to babysit an ebuild till it is |
6 |
> placed in portage as unstable? 6 months? |
7 |
|
8 |
Suppose you are a Gentoo developer and that you are going to commit those |
9 |
ebuilds in Portage. You are, as a developer, aware that *any* difficulty with |
10 |
the ebuild is *your* responsability. *You* must have tested the ebuild |
11 |
thouroughly and made sure that all variables and USE-settings are in place. |
12 |
Now if this is an ebuild you don't even use, are you really motivated to take |
13 |
such a responsability? |
14 |
|
15 |
The Gentoo Linux Development is aware of this problem and is working on it. |
16 |
However, implementing a complete new scheme concerning responsability for |
17 |
ebuilds takes some time, not only to write out, but to test and make sure |
18 |
there aren't any fallbacks. So please bare with us and be patient. Read the |
19 |
GWN for the latest news on our Herd-implementation, but don't ask questions |
20 |
about it since the people in charge of that implementation would rather |
21 |
implement it than reply'ing to dozens of e-mails which will just slow down |
22 |
their development pace. |
23 |
|
24 |
And if you aren't satistied with that answer, just think that we are in an |
25 |
ebuild-freeze (we're not, but just suppose we are) to increase our QA :) |
26 |
|
27 |
Wkr, |
28 |
Sven Vermeulen |
29 |
Gentoo Documentation |
30 |
|
31 |
-- |
32 |
Thanks to DRM, you know that something has been built in environment of |
33 |
unspecified degree of security, from source you cannot check, written by |
34 |
programmers you don't know, released after passing QA of unknown quality and |
35 |
which is released under a license that disclaims any responsibility... |