| 1 |
Olivier Crete wrote:[Tue Jun 07 2005, 05:56:35PM EDT] |
| 2 |
> Are you sure its not a policy? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Fairly certain. It's been discussed around in circles in the past. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> Because it should be and it has been |
| 7 |
> discussed before. Arch teams should NOT get ahead of the maintainer |
| 8 |
> without his permission... or if they really really know what they |
| 9 |
> are doing. Maintainers normally know their package/ebuilds and often |
| 10 |
> have very good reasons to keep a package ~arch for more than 30 |
| 11 |
> days.. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Ciaran would have something to say about this, along the lines of some |
| 14 |
packages sitting idle in ~arch state because the maintainer isn't |
| 15 |
really paying attention. In that case, who can really blame an arch |
| 16 |
team for moving ahead on their own? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Your statements make a lot of sense, and yes, it's how one would |
| 19 |
assume things work. But perspective can change when you're working on |
| 20 |
an architecture and losing patience with package maintainers. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
In practice, arch maintainers gradually learn what packages are |
| 23 |
well-maintained and what packages they stabilize without prior |
| 24 |
maintainer approval. A good example is foser's shepherding of |
| 25 |
gnome... in general the arches wait for his lead before stabilizing. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Regards, |
| 28 |
Aron |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Aron Griffis |
| 32 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
Archives