| 1 |
Donnie Berkholz wrote: [Wed Jun 23 2004, 03:09:41PM EDT] |
| 2 |
> A package maintainer doubles as arch maintainer for that package and |
| 3 |
> shouldn't be forced to hold it back from stable on an arch it is stable |
| 4 |
> on just because it isn't stable on every arch. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> That kind of freedom from essentially pointless inter-arch dependencies |
| 7 |
> is one of the things I enjoy about Gentoo. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Although I like the simplicity of the earlier proposals, I think that |
| 10 |
Spyderous hits the nail on the head here. Many people have been |
| 11 |
talking this point back and forth, and both pauldv and jstubbs |
| 12 |
recognized that there are two camps on this issue. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I'll be working on another round-up of the current discussion, taking |
| 15 |
this into account. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Regards, |
| 18 |
Aron |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Aron Griffis |
| 22 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
Archives