| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Carsten Lohrke wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Sunday 08 January 2006 01:35, Stuart Herbert wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> As Donnie already pointed out, I did not mean version bumps, but only new |
| 10 |
> packages. How about this idea: Everyone who adds a new package, has to check |
| 11 |
> and fix an unmaintained package before. This should be a non-issue for |
| 12 |
> seasoned developers, but would slowdown those, who continually add new |
| 13 |
> packages without caring for what they should maintain as well as those who |
| 14 |
> become new devs, add a bunch of packages and hide again, leaving the |
| 15 |
> maintenance to others. This would also have the benefit of continuous QA of |
| 16 |
> unmaintained stuff. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
In my opinion such prohibition will kill gentoo portage as there were no |
| 20 |
new apps and dev's will be sitting with old toys like in a closed room |
| 21 |
without windows and doors. If some package is unmaintained it's surely |
| 22 |
because users and devs forgotten it, upstream is dead and noone cares if |
| 23 |
its actual or not. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
- -- |
| 27 |
Paweł Madej aka Nysander |
| 28 |
http://quanteam.info | http://forum-farmaceutyczne.org |
| 29 |
http://nysander.quanteam.info | http://wiki.quanteam.info |
| 30 |
GPG key: 5861680B | keyserver: http://pgp.mit.edu |
| 31 |
key fingerprint: 34A9 B8BB DFA2 4F0B EFB5 CE50 82F4 8C82 5861 680B |
| 32 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 33 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
iD8DBQFDwR87gvSMglhhaAsRAleVAKCr7yxxDUUMExfL+r5QGoC5cIaD7gCglvp1 |
| 36 |
tAjLoNf2k9WqB+D1fSnz7VQ= |
| 37 |
=1F6t |
| 38 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives