Re: [gentoo-dev] Some ideas on how to reduce territoriality

[Mike Doty <kingtaco@gentoo.org>]

Chris Gianelloni wrote:
[snip]

> 
> There's a couple more that I wouldn't mind seeing as things developers
> can do without the maintainer, but I can see how these might be a bit
> more controversial, so I'm asking for input.
> 
> - Version bumps where the only requirement is to "cp" the ebuild
This is more on a per package basis.  it's not fair to force the maintainer to
support a new version before he feels it's ready.  For example, I'd love to
bump games-simulation/simutrans but Mr_Bones_ claims it's unstable and doesn't
want it bumped.  It wouldn't be fair to him for me to bump it unless I took the
burden of support.

> - (for arch teams) Stabilization of new revisions of an already stable
> package - An example of this would be being able to stabilize foo-1.0-r2
> if foo-1.0 (or foo-1.0-r1) is already stable, but not if only foo-0.9 is
> stable.
arch teams are the definitive authority on keywording for their arch.  That
said, if there is a disagreement between maintainer and arch team, the support
burden falls on whoever did the keyword.  Teamwork should solve this problem
every time.

I think the territoriality issue is one of support burden more than anything else.

--taco
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list