| 1 |
Vapier wrote: [Wed Nov 03 2004, 08:16:37PM CST] |
| 2 |
> does this really require a GLEP ? isnt this something the net-mail |
| 3 |
> herd could |
| 4 |
> have decided on themselves ? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
If the net-mail shepherds actually wanted to make this change, then |
| 7 |
it's quite true that a GLEP would not be required. My understanding is |
| 8 |
that the current situation is that the net-mail folks aren't opposed in |
| 9 |
principle, but they're (we're) worried that the additional flexibility |
| 10 |
will lead to a raft of new bug reports. When I e-mailed the author to |
| 11 |
let him know that I had posted his GLEP, I also suggested that he needs |
| 12 |
to address where the additional manpower would come from to implement |
| 13 |
and maintain it. As I'm sure you're well aware, the more critical the |
| 14 |
herd happens to be (e.g., base-system), the fewer people one can find to |
| 15 |
work on it. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-g2boojum- |
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Grant Goodyear |
| 20 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 21 |
g2boojum@g.o |
| 22 |
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum |
| 23 |
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 |
Archives