| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> Well, if it's in ~arch it's a candidate to go to stable after further |
| 3 |
> testing. If a package maintainer isn't prepared to have a package moved |
| 4 |
> to stable, they shouldn't take it out of package.mask. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
The 30 days are just a rule, there are enough packages which surely need a |
| 7 |
longer testing period, even if they work flawlessly. Or would you mark gcc 4.0 |
| 8 |
stable after 30 days? I think that's what Paul wanted to say. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
-- |
| 11 |
Simon Stelling |
| 12 |
Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead |
| 13 |
blubb@g.o |
| 14 |
-- |
| 15 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives