[gentoo-dev] Should "orphan" package without any "stable" version be stabilized?

[gentoo-dev] Should "orphan" package without any "stable" version be stabilized?

[Pacho Ramos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 376 bytes --]

I have just seen this:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=323265

app-office/ledger doesn't have any maintainer and has no stable version,
also, seems that no other app requires this to be stabilized. I would
prefer to keep this in testing until a maintainer really maintains it
downstream, but I am not sure if there is already some policy on
this :-/

Thanks

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Should "orphan" package without any "stable" version be stabilized?

[Christian Faulhammer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 629 bytes --]

Hi,

Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>:
> app-office/ledger doesn't have any maintainer and has no stable
> version, also, seems that no other app requires this to be
> stabilized. I would prefer to keep this in testing until a maintainer
> really maintains it downstream, but I am not sure if there is already
> some policy on this :-/

 Generally it should not be stabilised.  But based on common sense
 (simple program, no dependencies), you could do it.

V-Li

-- 
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Should "orphan" package without any "stable" version be stabilized?

[Pacho Ramos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 957 bytes --]

El jue, 24-06-2010 a las 17:44 +0200, Christian Faulhammer escribió:
> Hi,
> 
> Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>:
> > app-office/ledger doesn't have any maintainer and has no stable
> > version, also, seems that no other app requires this to be
> > stabilized. I would prefer to keep this in testing until a maintainer
> > really maintains it downstream, but I am not sure if there is already
> > some policy on this :-/
> 
>  Generally it should not be stabilised.  But based on common sense
>  (simple program, no dependencies), you could do it.
> 
> V-Li
> 

OK, I was doubtful because when a package lacks maintainer, maybe it's
not fully tested and some bugs could be opened and, then, rarely fixed
(as they would be assigned to maintainer-needed). On the other hand, I
would hope that preserving those packages in "testing", their users
wouldn't expect it to be as "stable" and "properly maintained" as a
package marked "stable".

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]