Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:24:04
Message-Id: 1268241833.20941.14.camel@gdartigu.lan.rep.sj
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday? by Nathan Zachary
1 Le mardi 09 mars 2010 à 22:32 -0600, Nathan Zachary a écrit :
2 > On 09/03/10 22:08, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
3 > > Hello!
4 > >
5 > >
6 > > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment:
7 > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump
8 > >
9 > > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their
10 > > maintainers in Gentoo.
11
12 For gnome assigned bumps, I can tell all of them have a reason/policy
13 that explains why they are not done yet and I definitively don't want
14 non-maintainer bumps for them.
15
16 > Not sure that my opinion matters all that much as I'm not currently
17 > doing ebuild work, but I think this idea could really help out the
18 > status of the tree. Attached to it could be a stabilisation day as
19 > well.
20
21 That I would buy. I often hear users complaining that stable isn't that
22 stable and they try to mix ~arch or completely move to ~arch instead of
23 asking for stablereq. Here too gnome has a policy for some packages but
24 a couple of them can be stabilized independently. Either way the
25 reaction is generally quick.
26
27 --
28 Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@g.o>
29 Gentoo