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 1RTb3y-0000jN-6w for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2011 15:18:10 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9131121C02E; Thu, 24 Nov 2011 15:18:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70AC721C041 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2011 15:17:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from phjr-macbookpro.local (fi122.internetdsl.tpnet.pl [80.53.34.122]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: phajdan.jr) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 42D4E1B400B for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2011 15:17:31 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4ECE6002.5070109@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 16:17:22 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?IlBhd2XFgiBIYWpkYW4sIEpyLiI=?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 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: making the stable tree more up-to-date References: <4ECA0EA3.8020407@gentoo.org> <20111123152036.TA0db695.tv@veller.net> In-Reply-To: <20111123152036.TA0db695.tv@veller.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.3 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig43C1590ED78199ED326F9985" X-Archives-Salt: c64e83c2-b593-4a3e-9de9-42fd073e719d X-Archives-Hash: 26eeca8944470328797b738b3ee375a4 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig43C1590ED78199ED326F9985 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/23/11 3:27 PM, Torsten Veller wrote: > What do you expect to happen with bugs assigned to maintainer-needed? I'm going to CC arches myself after a while, similarly as with bugs with other maintainers who don't respond. > I don't know if any of the packages is really good to be stabilized. > Maybe they are better than the current stable version, maybe not. 1. Note that my script only considers packages with no open bugs. 2. It's good for stable to be closer to ~arch, because that's what most developers use it seems. It's also quite common for the stable version to contain more bugs that are fixed in a more recent version. 3. Arch testing results in... more testing, so filing of such a bug may actually result in real bugs being filed against the package. I think that's good. Pawe=C5=82 --------------enig43C1590ED78199ED326F9985 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAk7OYAcACgkQuUQtlDBCeQJV0ACdHVJezINWjKJSRfj4HjRssH5C Dv4An1FC609eU+QG0EqLhH5Eq+hGAPAr =/fd0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig43C1590ED78199ED326F9985--