Re: [gentoo-science] science overlay vs. main tree

[George Shapovalov]

Hi Thomas,

Usually, our main "requirement" was presence of the active maintainer. As you 
are, apparently, its maintainer, I say all the decisions are up to you ;). Can 
you keep the old version in the tree (it is not broken after all, as I 
gather?) and provide a new one in the overlay for a time being? May be the 
upstream will come to its senses and you will be able to reintroduce newer 
version to the tree later? Or, even simpler, what's the problem with just 
keeping the new version unstable until new "unbroken" one is introducedor the 
"new way"becomes accepted?

George

On Sunday 28 July 2013 21:25:53 Thomas Kahle wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what are our current heuristics to decide if a package goes into main
> tree or stays in the science overlay?  Two years ago I spent a lot of
> time to get my beloved Macaulay2 tree ready and we even had a stable
> version (getting old now).  Stabilising a new version is blocked among
> other things because the build system does not respect a custom AR (bug
> 474784) and RANLIB (bug 474788).  Even if its not too hard, I'm not
> going to fix those.  This would be just ridiculous.  I probably know all
> the users of Macaulay2 on Gentoo personally.  None of them want to use a
> different ar.  So, should I treeclean M2 and move it back to overlay
> only?
>
> Cheers,
> Thomas