From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD8661381F3 for ; Wed, 22 May 2013 12:53:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CC4A8E0877; Wed, 22 May 2013 12:53:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB4FDE0841 for ; Wed, 22 May 2013 12:53:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.160] (CPE002401f30b73-CM001cea3ddad8.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.224.181.112]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: axs) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D7A333E211 for ; Wed, 22 May 2013 12:53:05 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <519CBFB2.2000103@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 08:53:06 -0400 From: Ian Stakenvicius User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130516 Thunderbird/17.0.6 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] robo-stable bugs References: <20130519154027.37b6cdf4@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> <5199678F.4090207@gentoo.org> <519B66BF.4090304@gentoo.org> <519BE584.1080507@gentoo.org> <519C0693.5020206@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <519C0693.5020206@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: be781574-17e8-45e6-a49e-5197825bb4ca X-Archives-Hash: 0620a0e7932795689b9767b525834534 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 21/05/13 07:43 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: > [ Snip reasons for why opt-out is bad ] So why don't we add something to package metadata, to indicate that a package is OK to be considered for auto-stabilization?? It lets everyone opt-in, and we still have the opportunity to opt-out if we want to at stable-bug-request time (or better, the dev can file their own bug to indicate stabilization will not occur or will occur later once XYZ are met or w/e).. We include it in the default metadata.xml template going forward, and request all dev's add it to their packages if they want to contribute. Thoughts? (Note: I also recall there being some sort of blacklist mentioned, where is the info for that stored? IE, how could I put a package in that blacklist?) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlGcv7IACgkQ2ugaI38ACPA9ewEAp5IwDre3O8iz+UurnAhDsCF5 fIWcearEExwknl14U48A/0IW0sI0Yxs+qnQnJaE1kUut/kQT6PxanFGqz3mV+oiI =zqJh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----