| 1 |
On 01/14/2014 05:33 PM, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 04:57:30PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 01/14/2014 04:37 PM, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> |
| 5 |
>>> 2. I would like to see the policy below applied to all arch's [2]. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> [ ] Yup |
| 8 |
>> [X] Nope |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> The reverse of this would be to let maintainers stabilize on all arch's |
| 11 |
> after 90 days, then they are allowed to remove all but the latest stable |
| 12 |
> version. This isn't good though because maintainers would be stabilizing |
| 13 |
> packages on arch's where they can't test. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> The stable tree is significantly behind because the arch teams are so |
| 16 |
> short staffed, and this prooposal is an attempt to fix that. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
It's attempting to fix a headache with a bullet. The arch teams are |
| 19 |
lagging behind, you're annoyed, I get it. Give 'em hell. But don't break |
| 20 |
stable to make a point. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
For users, both options are worse than the status quo. |
Archives