| 1 |
Am Donnerstag, 10. März 2016, 20:19:11 schrieb Alexis Ballier: |
| 2 |
> Well, you can go into the debate whether perfectly working and needed |
| 3 |
> behavior predating PMS which EAPI0 was supposed to normalize is a PMS bug |
| 4 |
> or a portage bug, |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
And this type of argumentation is *exactly* the reason why I am bringing up |
| 7 |
the agenda topic. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Either we have a specification (and then we should either stick to it or |
| 10 |
improve it) or we don't. Still regularly coming up with "blah blah this was |
| 11 |
before PMS, serious infighting between devs, portage was perfectly fine, no I |
| 12 |
won't fix anything" after 8 (EIGHT) years is not an option anymore. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
The main reason for the deadline proposal is that maintainers get their |
| 15 |
backsides moving. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Yes one possible fix indeed is a PMS improvement, we all know this probably |
| 18 |
will surpass all deadline time requirements. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
However, if there is no motion in an issue AT ALL, the deadline should make it |
| 21 |
possible to bypass maintainers and delegate a solution to QA at some point. No |
| 22 |
more stalling. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Andreas K. Huettel |
| 27 |
Gentoo Linux developer |
| 28 |
dilfridge@g.o |
| 29 |
http://www.akhuettel.de/ |
Archives