| 1 |
On Thursday 07 October 2004 20:37, Jon Portnoy wrote: |
| 2 |
> > This is a big fat reminder that no-herd is really against the policy and |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> What policy? |
| 5 |
That all packages should be herded, that is theoretically. Practically, all |
| 6 |
means as soon as they find a maintainer/herd. And no, no-herd is *not* a |
| 7 |
herd, at least it is not defined in herds.xml ;). |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Well, there were arguments thrown back and forth on whether to permit no-herd |
| 10 |
"herd", but IIRC everybody simply remained at their opinion, that is some to |
| 11 |
not permit and others (who apparently added these metadata files :)) that it |
| 12 |
is permissible. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
In any case, in this particular instance I would like to call devs who |
| 15 |
maintain singular/twopacks of language related packages not categorized on |
| 16 |
their own to use lang-misc herd instead of this no-herd nonsense.. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
George |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives