1 |
Here's my proposal for dealing with modular X entering ~arch. |
2 |
|
3 |
Yes, some packages are going to break. But I intend to keep this to a |
4 |
minimum on packages people care about, as measured by the existence of |
5 |
an open porting bug. |
6 |
|
7 |
So here's my plan: Before modular X enters ~arch, I will ensure that all |
8 |
porting bugs blocking #112675 are closed. As new bugs are filed, I will |
9 |
ensure that they are closed within 2 days, giving their maintainers that |
10 |
long to respond and close it themselves. After 2 days, I, or other |
11 |
members of the x11 team and any volunteers, will jump in and fix it |
12 |
ourselves. |
13 |
|
14 |
Earlier tonight, I discussed with halcy0n our differing opinions of the |
15 |
need for modular X to enter ~arch and break trees for some ~arch users. |
16 |
In my opinion, this is acceptable and beneficial, as ~arch users should |
17 |
already be those willing to help out. It will assist in learning which |
18 |
of the still-unported apps are actually in use and help compile a |
19 |
possible list of tree removal candidates. halcy0n, on the other hand, |
20 |
feels that any breakage of the ~arch tree is anathema. |
21 |
|
22 |
Please contact me if you'd like to be one of these volunteers. Requirements: |
23 |
|
24 |
A) You have commit access to gentoo-x86, AND |
25 |
B) you're comfortable with the porting process OR are adept with ebuilds |
26 |
and would like to help |
27 |
|
28 |
It's my earnest hope that this proposal makes everyone happy, because I |
29 |
refuse to let modular X get old and rusty in package.mask while hundreds |
30 |
of unmaintained (or undermaintained, for whatever reason) applications |
31 |
hold it back. |
32 |
|
33 |
Thanks, |
34 |
Donnie |