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 1EGN7i-0004ii-34 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 20:47:54 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8GKfUcs010267; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 20:41:30 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 j8GKcfki006666 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 20:38:41 GMT Received: from 82-41-57-20.cable.ubr08.edin.blueyonder.co.uk ([82.41.57.20] helo=snowdrop.home) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EGN3k-0005ec-MP for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 20:43:48 +0000 Received: from localhost.home ([127.0.0.1] helo=snowdrop.home) by snowdrop.home with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EGN4L-0005ek-9Q for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:44:25 +0100 Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:44:20 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] first council meeting Message-ID: <20050916214420.25408844@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <200509161633.13867.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <20050915205149.GB22270@vino.zko.hp.com> <200509161515.26063.vapier@gentoo.org> <20050916203437.33cfb0fa@snowdrop.home> <200509161633.13867.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.13 (GTK+ 2.6.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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=Signature_Fri__16_Sep_2005_21_44_20_+0100_wnIsCpcT2_IJWNbw; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: f99277c2-9e0d-4347-8f06-3a5b9b7914ef X-Archives-Hash: 0d88e7ee2ed41a59e30f463cc89b8d7e --Signature_Fri__16_Sep_2005_21_44_20_+0100_wnIsCpcT2_IJWNbw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature_Fri__16_Sep_2005_21_44_20_+0100_wnIsCpcT2_IJWNbw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDKy6o96zL6DUtXhERArAHAJ0TXRbGJ8Bsuf/NHD8zVP314wG3AwCg4sdH sweVksosBPufPp9v4OEsOGo= =+OAE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature_Fri__16_Sep_2005_21_44_20_+0100_wnIsCpcT2_IJWNbw-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list