Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/PyZilla: PyZilla-0.1.0.ebuild ChangeLog metadata.xml

[Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1240 bytes --]

On 02:39 Mon 28 Mar     , Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> Where did this come from? My entire argument was based around the fact
> that unmaintained packages that may or may not be broken fundamentally
> constitute a *bad* experience for the user. If we cannot guarantee
> that bugs for a package will be fixed, we should not take up the
> responsibility of the package!
> 
> Which is worse? Suddenly pulling a package from underneath the feet of
> users when it inevitably breaks or telling them upfront that it's
> *completely not* supported by us so they can do something about it
> before it breaks?

Here's the key point: "may or may not." Arbitrary criteria with no 
relevance to whether a package works for users are not helpful.

The mere existence of a maintainer-needed package doesn't mean it should 
be removed. The existence of the same thing with numerous serious, 
unfixed bugs or tinderbox errors means something much different.

We have the ability to do these kinds of intersections today, since our 
wonderful bug wranglers normally insert the $CAT/$PN into summaries and 
Diego has tinderbox bugs filed.

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.com

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