On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:45:41 +0000 Stuart Herbert wrote: | On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 14:19 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | > Two ways this one can occur. | | [snip] | | Third way ... upstream is a provider of commercial software, and | releases different editions of the same software with identical | filenames. Then you must talk to upstream and get them to change their ways. | I have the QA team on bug #123926 asserting that they have the right | to tell me to remove packages from the tree, because of basename | $SRC_URI filename collisions. We don't *want* to remove the package from the tree. We want to get the breakage fixed. | To the best of my knowledge, there's no policy document in existence | empowering the QA team to order package maintainers to remove packages | from Portage. I've asked the team to provide a copy if one exists, | but I haven't seen one yet. The team have (twice now) instead stated | that the email at the top of this thread is their authority. There's no policy document in existence that explicitly says that you (by name) can add stuff to the tree either. Most of our policy is undocumented, because it's impossible to cover every situation. The number one rule, however, is to be sensible and not commit things that cause breakages. Again, we don't *want* to remove it. On the other hand, if you refuse to work with us to get the problem fixed, we're going to have to do something about it ourselves. | Also, I cannot find this SRC_URI rule (as being applied by the QA | team) in any official Gentoo policy document. As I recall, pretty much nothing about digests at all is in any official policy document. Nor is nearly anything else on any development topic. However, that it is not explicitly forbidden does not mean that it should be done. Where in policy does it say that you shouldn't commit pictures of teletubbies in SVG format in the tree? -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm