public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Volkov <pva@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:56:35 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1226393795.10664.39.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4918DE04.8010207@gentoo.org>


Why it's so hard not to delete ebuilds from the tree? Also it was
already discussed that if maintainer wishes he/she could drop some
keywords from old ebuild, e.g. if you have more recent version of
package stabilized on arch, just drop arch keyword from the old ebuild.

В Пнд, 10/11/2008 в 20:21 -0500, Richard Freeman пишет:
> I guess the question is whether package maintainers should be forced
> to maintain packages that are outdated by a significant period of
> time. Suppose something breaks a package that is 3 versions behind
> stable on all archs but one (where it is the current stable).  Should
> the package maintainer be required to fix it, rather than just delete
> it?  I suspect that the maintainer would be more likely to just leave
> it broken, which doesn't exactly leave things better-off for the end
> users.

The package maintainer just should add depend on stabilization bug and
leave resolution of the issue to arch team. Package maintainer already
fixed things on his end so he has nothing to do...

-- 
Peter.




  reply	other threads:[~2008-11-11  8:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-10 18:13 [gentoo-dev] Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds Mark Loeser
2008-11-10 18:23 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2008-11-10 18:23 ` Mart Raudsepp
2008-11-10 20:32   ` Steev Klimaszewski
2008-11-10 21:16 ` Jeremy Olexa
2008-11-10 21:57 ` Santiago M. Mola
2008-11-11  0:24 ` Jose Luis Rivero
2008-11-11  1:13   ` Mark Loeser
2008-11-11  9:31     ` Jose Luis Rivero
2008-11-11  1:21   ` Richard Freeman
2008-11-11  8:56     ` Peter Volkov [this message]
2008-11-11 10:18     ` Jose Luis Rivero
2008-11-11 13:49       ` Ferris McCormick
2008-11-11 16:06       ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2008-11-11 16:24         ` Jeroen Roovers
2008-11-11 17:26           ` Duncan
2008-11-11 17:55             ` Ferris McCormick
2008-11-11 18:12             ` Jeroen Roovers
2008-11-11 21:03               ` Duncan
2008-11-13 17:38 ` [gentoo-dev] " Tobias Scherbaum
2008-11-15 13:02   ` Matti Bickel
2008-11-17 18:08     ` Tobias Scherbaum
2008-11-17 19:03       ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2008-12-11  5:35       ` [gentoo-dev] " Donnie Berkholz
2008-11-17  0:38 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ryan Hill
2008-11-17 15:10   ` Daniel Gryniewicz
2008-11-18  1:08     ` Ryan Hill
2008-11-18 16:57       ` Daniel Gryniewicz
2008-11-18 17:50         ` Ciaran McCreesh
2008-11-18 20:31           ` Daniel Gryniewicz
2008-11-18 21:18         ` Ryan Hill
2008-11-18 22:04           ` Daniel Gryniewicz
2008-11-18 22:45             ` Ryan Hill
2008-11-30 22:59 ` Ryan Hill
2008-12-01  7:49   ` Peter Volkov
2008-12-11  5:37 ` [gentoo-dev] " Donnie Berkholz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1226393795.10664.39.camel@localhost \
    --to=pva@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox