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 1EGOGo-0005sc-Qy for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 22:01:23 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8GLsEjC015791; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:54:14 GMT Received: from ctb-mesg6.saix.net (ctb-mesg6.saix.net [196.25.240.86]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8GLpZ46017112 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:51:36 GMT Received: from gateway.lan (wblv-146-223-181.telkomadsl.co.za [165.146.223.181]) by ctb-mesg6.saix.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7CB9670E for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:56:43 +0200 (SAST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gateway.lan (Postfix) with ESMTP id 350793A248E for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:30:49 +0200 (SAST) Received: from gateway.lan ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gateway.lan [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 20886-09 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:30:35 +0200 (SAST) Received: from lycan.lan (lycan.lan [192.168.0.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gateway.lan (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD3593A241D for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:30:35 +0200 (SAST) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] first council meeting From: Martin Schlemmer To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200509161659.56603.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <20050915205149.GB22270@vino.zko.hp.com> <200509161633.13867.vapier@gentoo.org> <20050916214420.25408844@snowdrop.home> <200509161659.56603.vapier@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-5DFIkYaU2zqIEIu5H6ky" Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:57:32 +0200 Message-Id: <1126907853.5006.98.camel@lycan.lan> 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 2.4.0 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at nosferatu.za.org X-Archives-Salt: ce102285-0db0-476c-8062-6bc35d35a4b6 X-Archives-Hash: 29291825a32533319347adfe1721834b --=-5DFIkYaU2zqIEIu5H6ky Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2005-09-16 at 16:59 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Friday 16 September 2005 04:44 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 16:33:13 -0400 Mike Frysinger > > > > wrote: > > | ok, e17 packages dont count here. however, your hardcore view i > > | still dont buy. how about the baselayout-1.9.x -> baselayout-1.11.x > > | stabilization process ? are you telling me that arch teams should > > | have had the power to move those into stable without talking to the > > | maintainer ? baselayout may be a core package, but if you continue > > | with your hard rule here, then it doesnt matter. > > > > I'm saying that arch teams should be allowed to mark it stable if they > > think it's appropriate. Not that it must be moved to stable after $x > > days, but that it can be at the arch team's discretion. And any arch > > team which is silly enough to mark a broken baselayout stable has far > > bigger problems anyway... >=20 > baselayout is an example, any package can be used here (although not many= are=20 > as critical) >=20 > i'm saying that the maintainer may have a certain idea of when the packag= e is=20 > ready for stable (a target feature set, working out certain quirks, etc..= .). =20 > your current hard view does not allow for that. for example, i had an ar= ch=20 > maintainer one time mark bash-3 stable before base-system was ready for i= t=20 > (readline, baselayout, etc... were going to be stabilized together). i=20 > smacked them hard for it, but if we went with this hard view, it would ha= ve=20 > been perfectly acceptable behavior. We still have KEYWORDS=3D"-*". Sure, I know many do not like it, and if something was decided in regards to it, I missed it, but it is generally seen as 'less severe' than a package.mask'd mask, and its local to the package, so should not get stale. --=20 Martin Schlemmer --=-5DFIkYaU2zqIEIu5H6ky Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDKz/MqburzKaJYLYRAvvqAJ0Zt27S5YH51veXetyNi15FR+BMVQCfZHDp tTmX+gd2JIuh6lC7iIcf3pI= =m8y3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-5DFIkYaU2zqIEIu5H6ky-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list