| 1 |
Ferris McCormick wrote: [Tue Jun 22 2004, 02:08:42PM EDT] |
| 2 |
> I think I prefer the additional keyword. I am more interested in the |
| 3 |
> maintainer's opinion than I am in the maintainer's architecture, and the |
| 4 |
> extra keyword makes it clear the maintainer is signing off. After all, |
| 5 |
> if I or anyone else keywords a package without adding the 'stable,' it |
| 6 |
> is very clear that for some reason an architecture is compelled to jump |
| 7 |
> ahead. I also want to know if there is an active maintainer --- |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
All good points. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> But then, I have been working in some dusty corners of the portage tree, |
| 12 |
> where I am not sure there even is a maintainer anymore. I recently marked |
| 13 |
> a package stable for sparc, and the keywording on it now looks like this: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> KEYWORDS="~x86 ~ppc sparc mips ~alpha arm ~hppa amd64 ~ia64 ppc64 s390" |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Changelog indicates a lot of recent activity, metadata indicates no-herd, |
| 18 |
> no maintainer, and I haven't a clue which if any architecture controls. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Yep, I see that regularly too. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I think that I will write another email on this thread summarizing the |
| 23 |
current possible approaches, their pros and cons, and then hopefully |
| 24 |
we can have a conclusive discussion to choose one of them. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Regards, |
| 27 |
Aron |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Aron Griffis |
| 31 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
Archives