| 1 |
On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 21:05 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> Workable for a certain category of packages so long as it's advisory |
| 3 |
> only. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Workable for the vast majority of packages in the tree I expect. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> Arch teams need to be allowed to override maintainers where |
| 8 |
> appropriate, |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Why not talk to the package maintainers instead, and convince them that |
| 11 |
you need a different version marking "maint" instead? Why |
| 12 |
"override" (which, tbh, smacks of "we arch teams know best, life would |
| 13 |
be better without package maintainers") when you could work with people |
| 14 |
instead? You're *not* in competition with package maintainers. We're |
| 15 |
all supposed to be working towards the same thing :) |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I've no personal problem with arch teams sometimes needing to do their |
| 18 |
own thing, provided it's confined to a specific class of package. |
| 19 |
Outside of the core packages required to boot & maintain a platform, |
| 20 |
when is there ever a need for arch maintainers to decide that they know |
| 21 |
better than package maintainers? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
If this isn't confined - if arch maintainers are allowed to override |
| 24 |
package maintainers wherever they want to - then arch teams need to take |
| 25 |
on the support burden. Fair's fair - if it's the arch team creating the |
| 26 |
support, it's only fair that they support users in these cases. It's |
| 27 |
completely unfair - and unrealistic - to expect a package maintainer to |
| 28 |
support a package he/she thinks isn't fit to be stable on an arch that |
| 29 |
he/she probably doesn't use anyway. In such a conflict of egos, the |
| 30 |
real losers remain our users. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> And "maint" as a name? Yick. "maintainer" or "owner" maybe. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
It's just a word. Provided the concept is agreed on, the word isn't the |
| 35 |
most important thing in the world. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Best regards, |
| 38 |
Stu |
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
Stuart Herbert stuart@g.o |
| 41 |
Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ |
| 42 |
http://stu.gnqs.org/diary/ |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu |
| 45 |
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C |
| 46 |
-- |
Archives