| 1 |
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Raúl Porcel <armin76@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Ryan Hill wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:41:28 +0200 |
| 5 |
>> Raúl Porcel <armin76@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>>> IMHO the packages should be keyworded if an arch team member or an |
| 8 |
>>> user of that arch requests it. Keywording something if an user of |
| 9 |
>>> said arch doesn't request it, is a waste of resources. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> How is making things available to your users a waste of resources? |
| 12 |
>> Anyways, if you're so far behind that you don't think you can manage |
| 13 |
>> keywording another package then just say so and deny the request. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> What does this have to do with council? |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> And whats the point of having some package keyworded if nobody is going to |
| 19 |
> use it? |
| 20 |
> I don't care anyway, i just want an official clarification, personally i |
| 21 |
> tend to keyword stuff if i think its going to be useful. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Thing is, whats the difference in a maintainer asking for a package to be |
| 24 |
> keyworded and keywording all the packages in the tree? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
You're not going to be asked to keyword the whole tree, that's the |
| 27 |
difference ;-) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I think we have not enough feedback from users about this. Either |
| 30 |
Bugzilla is not the right tool, or we don't encourage users enough to |
| 31 |
ask for keywords when they need them. Currently, some people assume |
| 32 |
that "if a user from $arch needed this package, he'd have requested |
| 33 |
keywords", but that's wrong. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Regards, |
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Santiago M. Mola |
| 38 |
Jabber ID: cooldwind@×××××.com |
| 39 |
éí¢‡^¾X¬¶È žÚ(¢¸&j)bž b² |
Archives