Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: foser <foser@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] From [gentoo-dev] Arches marking ebuilds stable before maintainer
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 20:49:03
Message-Id: 1087678133.21017.65.camel@rivendell
From -core, please stop crossposting it.

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

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies