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 1EEsCt-0003YD-HZ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:35:03 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8CHTwWn018568; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:29:58 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 j8CHSGoj006244 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:28:17 GMT Received: from c132231.adsl.hansenet.de ([213.39.132.231] helo=iglu.bnet.local) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EEsAb-0006Qz-1Y for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:32:41 +0000 From: Carsten Lohrke To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ROX: maintainer-wanted and apps out of date Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:32:32 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <1126447110.10560.13.camel@localhost> <200509121356.02558.carlo@gentoo.org> <20050912180325.3d9bdb08@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <20050912180325.3d9bdb08@snowdrop.home> 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1818369.PZdWpIztbG"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200509121932.37955.carlo@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 80fc4ba7-3b14-46ca-b407-c9696d649e3f X-Archives-Hash: 69fe1caa8b68cbd7dc38aa383ac5d0f3 --nextPart1818369.PZdWpIztbG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Monday 12 September 2005 19:03, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > The easiest way to improve those ebuilds' chances > of getting into the tree is by getting them up to a good enough > standard that whoever picks them up is very unlikely to have to do > major extra work on them. To have even more unmaintained packages in the tree. The tree it is that ne= eds=20 QA. If "maintainer-wanted" bugs stay open forever - who cares. > It was discussed on this list. Thanks for the pointer. :p So from the user point of view it's better to fi= le=20 a request without attaching an ebuild, because it wouldn't directly resolve= d=20 WONTFIX?! (Before you answer that: From the user point of view, not your's.= )=20 I mean I'm often giving a pointer on an formal issue or a very wrong attemp= t,=20 but being that strict is not neecessary, discouraging and probably some eve= n=20 take the chance to molest about Gentoo, imho. Carsten --nextPart1818369.PZdWpIztbG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDJbu1VwbzmvGLSW8RAqgRAJ4lawS5K8tJkp4caS0KAc7FAKid0gCgpuir rRYXhwyPm1ChwtdoEcw+px4= =KJE+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1818369.PZdWpIztbG-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list