Archives
Archives
| From: | Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@l.g.o> | ||
| Subject: | Re: Why lastrite when it works? (Was: Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs due to retirement) | ||
| Date: | Fri, 06 Jan 2017 17:27:15 | ||
| Message-Id: | CAGfcS_=uv1JgnYR+d=1XvHyT=xWqsUWKwwVH33NZRAa3tTVrjQ@mail.gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: Why lastrite when it works? (Was: Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs due to retirement) by Alec Warner |
||
| 1 | On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 | > |
| 3 | > So my understanding of the status quo is that maintainers get to make the |
| 4 | > call with regard to what is reasonable to keep or drop. I'm loathe to add |
| 5 | > additional policy here; mostly because the expectation is that the |
| 6 | > maintainer has the most state here. That doesn't mean you can't: |
| 7 | > |
| 8 | |
| 9 | I think the main concern is with unmaintained packages. |
| 10 | |
| 11 | |
| 12 | -- |
| 13 | Rich |