From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ECODr-0000K8-FM for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2005 21:09:47 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j85L570t018815; Mon, 5 Sep 2005 21:05:07 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j85L2xod002393 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2005 21:02:59 GMT Received: from [82.155.52.184] (helo=bl6-52-184.dsl.telepac.pt) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1ECOAM-0004uS-RQ for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2005 21:06:11 +0000 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] tentative x86 arch team glep From: Luis Medinas To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <431CAD9A.8000304@gentoo.org> References: <20050904143711.GD23576@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <1125865598.11360.122.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <20050904215931.53b9db51@snowdrop.home> <200509042009.37676.morfic@gentoo.org> <1125948029.10669.35.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <20050905203729.01e6b212@snowdrop.home> <1125951397.10663.79.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <20050905213452.2a88279b@snowdrop.home> <431CAD9A.8000304@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 22:02:51 +0000 Message-Id: <1125957771.14476.25.camel@darksystem> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 1a1a4288-1e2b-4351-99c7-783f8b92ee8f X-Archives-Hash: 0287cc0e3304b4f391fde5222577bd62 On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 22:42 +0200, Simon Stelling wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > | I'm asking that you assume any support burden that you create. It > > | only seems fair. > > > > Stabling a package which is not in packahe.mask is only a support > > burden if package maintainers are abusing ~arch. > > I absolutely agree with you, the only point is: > > People are abusing ~arch in the real world, and we're not yet living in an ideal > world. Yes it's true probably we should introduce another keyword for maintainers that is completly unstable. Then the Archs Teams keyword the packages. Most of the people don't understand that ~arch is a testing keyword and it's not stable. Fortunatly most of the bugs we get are from ~arch and not from stable arch. -- Luis Medinas http://dev.gentoo.org/~metalgod Gentoo Linux Developer: AMD64,Printing,Media-Optical -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list