| 1 |
On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 10:36 -0400, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 2 |
> Stuart Herbert wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On 9/3/06, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> And no one has implemented any kind of solution. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > You need someone to implement a solution? Surely what we need is for |
| 7 |
> > folks to actually make an announcement in the first place? |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > I asked for what has become GLEP 42 because we do have a problem |
| 10 |
> > reaching folks with announcements. But you know what? GLEP 42 |
| 11 |
> > wouldn't help in cases like this, where there's either no announcement |
| 12 |
> > at all, or the announcement comes at the last minute. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > Technology is just a tool. A technical solution needs something fed |
| 15 |
> > into it. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> I never specified that the solution had to be technical in nature ;) |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> We have the Gentoo Status project, but it's been rather dead lately. We |
| 20 |
> have PR, but they are more concerned with the release; in the end |
| 21 |
> GCC-4.1 going stable is up to releng and arch teams (heck it doesn't |
| 22 |
> technically have to go stable on all arches). So who "screwed up" in |
| 23 |
> this case? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Actually, we spent a fair amount of time talking about Gentoo Status in |
| 26 |
yesterdays meeting and how to move forwards with that. As for PR, after |
| 27 |
the Userrel + PR merge we have more manpower, and we're not concerned |
| 28 |
with just the release. Hell, as far as the release goes, PR for that is |
| 29 |
done by the Releng team and their PR coordinator. Don't assume that PR |
| 30 |
isn't interested, but we can't read minds and if people don't keep us in |
| 31 |
the loop then chances are we miss stuff that could be news worthy. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives