| 1 |
Dne Ne 10. února 2013 19:47:58, Patrick Lauer napsal(a): |
| 2 |
> On 02/10/2013 05:01 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
| 3 |
> > # Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> (10 Feb 2013) |
| 4 |
> > # Fails with gcc-4.7, crashes (#301946, #312073), problems with |
| 5 |
> > # boost (#319921), problems with python-2.7 (#338826), really old |
| 6 |
> > # version in the tree, people should move to sci overlay one (#424659). |
| 7 |
> > # Removal in a month. |
| 8 |
> > sci-visualization/paraview |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> So instead of moving things from random overlays to the tree we remove |
| 11 |
> packages now, remove features from other packages because of that |
| 12 |
> (openfoam) and then ... tell users to use an overlay? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Agreed this is pretty bad idea. The teams should actually have their top |
| 15 |
priority to include user contributions to main tree as much as possible. If |
| 16 |
the team does not have time to maintain the named package, just add some |
| 17 |
contributors as maintainers and do proxy-commits for them... |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
The greatest problem at least from my PoV is that we can't just simply git am |
| 20 |
loads of stuff users are contributing and must convert to cvs (thats actually |
| 21 |
what takes me most of the time). |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Having nice mailinglist where users can contribute simple patches would be |
| 24 |
briliant thing to use :-) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Cheers |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Tom |
Archives