| 1 |
On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 20:09 -0500, Daniel Goller wrote: |
| 2 |
> agreed talk/communcation is fine, if the maintainer is only trying to flex |
| 3 |
> muscles and does not have a good reason, the arch team ought to be able to do |
| 4 |
> what is best for gentoo and not be shot down by a (hm) stubborn(?) |
| 5 |
> maintainer, if the maintaner could do that, the arch team would be quite |
| 6 |
> limited in its effectiveness |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
That's a good example - one I hope doesn't occur too often ;-) Equally, |
| 9 |
there'll be times when the roles are reversed, and it's the arch team |
| 10 |
member flexing muscle. We're all human after all :) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Still, it'd only be fair for the arch team to assume the support burden |
| 13 |
for the package version if they do this w/out the support of the package |
| 14 |
maintainer. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Best regards, |
| 17 |
Stu |
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Stuart Herbert stuart@g.o |
| 20 |
Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ |
| 21 |
http://stu.gnqs.org/diary/ |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu |
| 24 |
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C |
| 25 |
-- |
Archives