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 1EGLkC-0007U8-8d for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:19:32 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8GJDDQu029061; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:13:13 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 j8GJA7e3010518 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:10:08 GMT Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=home.wh0rd.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EGLg2-0007a1-BD for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:15:14 +0000 Received: (qmail 9873 invoked from network); 16 Sep 2005 15:11:18 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2) by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 16 Sep 2005 15:11:18 -0400 From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] first council meeting Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 15:15:26 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <20050915205149.GB22270@vino.zko.hp.com> <200509162048.58261.pauldv@gentoo.org> <20050916200225.7ab159ab@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <20050916200225.7ab159ab@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: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200509161515.26063.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 466a1831-941b-4f11-88c2-77d47141f9ab X-Archives-Hash: 5ac341c4f076d98d70d684058eee49c8 On Friday 16 September 2005 03:02 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 20:48:45 +0200 Paul de Vrieze > > wrote: > | > Take it out of package.mask and leave it for thirty > | > (package-dependent) days. If there is a pressing (eg security) > | > reason for it to go to stable sooner than would normally be > | > expected, file a bug and Cc: the relevant arch teams. > | > | I was thinking more like signalling that it shouldn't be stable yet, > | but shouldn't be masked either. > > Well, if it's in ~arch it's a candidate to go to stable after further > testing. If a package maintainer isn't prepared to have a package moved > to stable, they shouldn't take it out of package.mask. not really ... sometimes you want to keep a package in unstable forever (like the cvs snapshots i make of e17), or until you work some quirks/features out for a new revbump which you would want stable -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list