From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RDfSp-0002vb-6J for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:45:59 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A99321C04A; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:45:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2669321C055 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:45:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.168.169] (dyn-199-173-dsl.vsp.fi [83.146.199.173]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ssuominen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 40D7A646CC for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:45:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4E94729F.8070008@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:45:19 +0300 From: Samuli Suominen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20111005 Thunderbird/7.0.1 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: media-gfx/pngcrush References: <4E900E3E.2070202@gentoo.org> <4E905C48.20008@gentoo.org> <20111008151336.GN704@gentoo.org> <4E91CDE7.8060201@gentoo.org> <1318311523.21990.35.camel@tablet> In-Reply-To: <1318311523.21990.35.camel@tablet> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: e490d5e0d258ac7f22da6ee5bd0ff4a1 On 10/11/2011 08:38 AM, Peter Volkov wrote: > =D0=92 =D0=92=D1=81=D0=BA, 09/10/2011 =D0=B2 22:28 +0000, Duncan =D0=BF= =D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: >> Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher Nguy=E1=BB=85n posted on Sun, 09 Oct 2011 1= 8:37:59 +0200 as >> excerpted: >> >>> Duncan schrieb: >>>> Libpng isn't held up that way, while the package still gets its 30 d= ay >>>> masking last-rites. No policy broken; no maintainer toes stepped on= as >>>> a result of the broken policy. No more nasty threads about (this) >>>> broken policy and unhappy maintainers as a result! =3D:^) >>> >>> Actually removing a package that doesn't violate any (written) rules >>> without maintainer consensus could be considered a violation of polic= y >>> too. >>> >>> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/recruiters/mentor.xml Respect >>> existing maintainers: >>> Never commit when someone else has clear ownership. Never commit on >>> things with unclear ownership until you've tried to clear it up. >=20 > Samuli pretends here to act as a part of QA team (although he is not). > Actually even whiteboard of stabilization bug tells #at _earliest_ 17 > Oct" and thus there is really no sign for rush. This is the case where > QA should voice and either explain why fast stabilization of libpng is > so important or stop policy breakage. That said it became really common > to break our own policies (with no attempts to amend policy). (sorry for replying to same mail again, but I've missed the baseless claim for fast stabilization) no such thing, as 17 Oct is 30 day from when libpng-1.5 was released to ~arch -- notice it was me who added the whiteboard status too, so arches DON'T stabilize it fast.