| 1 |
Hi Kevin, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On 6/15/06, Kevin F. Quinn <kevquinn@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> I read the "should" as |
| 5 |
> implying that all new packages must have it, and packages existing |
| 6 |
> before the introduction of metadata should get it as and when |
| 7 |
> maintainer gets around to it (i.e. at least on the next bump). |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Chris's argument was that this doc _requires_ packages to belong to |
| 10 |
herds (specifically, that all packages that are games automatically |
| 11 |
belong to the games herd). The document clearly doesn't support his |
| 12 |
argument. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> So you'd better have a good excuse for violating the rule if you do |
| 15 |
> so. Anyone adding a herd tag to meet the "shall", then putting garbage |
| 16 |
> in it that isn't the name of a defined herd for no good reason, |
| 17 |
> deserves to be spanked. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
?? Where has that come from? Has there been a spate of people doing this? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> However common sense suggests that anyone adding games to the tree |
| 22 |
> should join the games team and add the game to the games herd (which |
| 23 |
> obviously means playing by the rules of the team) - not least to provide |
| 24 |
> consistency; but also to be in the loop for overall games issues and to |
| 25 |
> provide the most sensible backup maintainers. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
As you say yourself, it's suggested, not mandatory - and it doesn't |
| 28 |
have to be a specific herd. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> In other words, you need to have a very good reason for avoiding the |
| 31 |
> games team and herd when adding a game to the tree. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
That's your personal opinion, which I respect, and I understand how |
| 34 |
you've come to that conclusion. But it doesn't change the fact that, |
| 35 |
if folks choose to maintain a game without joining the games herd, |
| 36 |
they're prefectly entitled to do so. And the same is true for |
| 37 |
webapps, or anything else. You simply can't go around clubbing people |
| 38 |
over the head and saying "that's a <project> project ebuild, join our |
| 39 |
team or it doesn't go into the tree", which is where this is leading. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
What we _don't_ want are folks adding a package to a tree and dumping |
| 42 |
it on a herd without their permission. That always has been a big 'no |
| 43 |
no' in Gentoo. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Best regards, |
| 46 |
Stu |
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives