| 1 |
From -core, please stop crossposting it. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Sat, 2004-06-19 at 21:17 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
> | It is my personal opinion that package maintainers should have the |
| 5 |
> | word on when something is stable. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> We are not Debian. Arch teams *must* be allowed to override package |
| 8 |
> maintainers *where necessary*. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Not without discussion without the maintainer . I never said this can't |
| 11 |
happen, i just said that it can't happen without the maintainer being in |
| 12 |
the known. Actually this is better for all arches involved. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Anyway, do not compare us to another distro to make your point, I hope |
| 15 |
we can come to decisions without the need to resort to such polarizing |
| 16 |
arguments. We're not Debian. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> This isn't a case of arch maintainers being irresponsible and going |
| 19 |
> around keywording all sorts of broken packages. Arch teams do not |
| 20 |
> usually go around overriding package maintainers, and where there is |
| 21 |
> any doubt the relevant maintainers are contacted first. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Arch maintainer show and have shown in the past they don't know |
| 24 |
everything about a package and thats nothing more than logical. There's |
| 25 |
only one conclusion you can draw from that, that arch maintainers should |
| 26 |
be heading the direction the package maintainer gives them. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> For those of you who missed it the first three times, *the current |
| 29 |
> system works*. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
This is just not true, i've seen it break things & this will happen more |
| 32 |
and more in the future. I've posted a recent example on -dev already, so |
| 33 |
I don't even know why you can still knowingly make this false statement. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> Oh, and since the skim readers will miss it otherwise, *the current |
| 36 |
> system works*. Did everyone see that? *the current system works*. Works, |
| 37 |
> the current system does. Le systeme courant marche deja. Die aktuelle |
| 38 |
> Loesung funktioniert. Romanes eunt domus. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Read above. You disregard any information contradicting your line of |
| 41 |
though, but this is nothing new. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
The current system is a mix of what used to be and what some newer arch |
| 44 |
devs think is a system that never existed in the first place. We should |
| 45 |
come to a conclusion that the maintainers arch is the relevant arch if |
| 46 |
it comes to marking stable. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
- foser |
Archives