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 CD97E1381F3 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:43:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2132621C04A; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:43:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ie0-f179.google.com (mail-ie0-f179.google.com [209.85.223.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE84321C0A2 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:42:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f179.google.com with SMTP id k14so6012792iea.38 for ; Tue, 04 Dec 2012 07:42:46 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :x-gm-message-state; bh=3g8N37VwclvIrZi566+B8yENEZ6Q8QJ7BZR5woMXs3c=; b=A5+lpCBuhs34KxvENRUtDogiaf/AB5VOdwrhjWshS5Jy3m6Ky4aWrRQ3olLnik9Sn2 aUyMbl3mi16cNoCRu1cVgYEC3brIP2Fwyawm02j/hLhwpSuvlKMUcvvHTgHZpTE7QjcI 3/+ohC87evxsF4P/zn01e9UpnqlzeGMt5KNg4P7KSViwx6RCSL4EIp/wudjDVEgYwcsa sIPPzdnuohTbhKJC1M+gCMerHFO/Fj2M5xAoSgBRdUHlDUvpAutcSYGaPRYkuH49UnBG DINdjZ9/xRLeGXcbmPXF4tYeTmRVI4kNac9isuju9XR9Or83Xc33NSMhJyRCBm/S0I7R C/gg== 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 Received: by 10.50.179.100 with SMTP id df4mr3126034igc.60.1354635765952; Tue, 04 Dec 2012 07:42:45 -0800 (PST) Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com Received: by 10.64.24.39 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 07:42:45 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [75.147.136.182] In-Reply-To: References: <50BB71DD.4080308@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 07:42:45 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: HC0X9EgYWohocqvl3k02H2bFE5w Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] introduce a soft-limit policy for changing other developers ebuilds From: Alec Warner To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmew4hztQUgbK9jqW1//4QeyVk8JCiF2bX1BUaHLpQ4AlRmvhBD4HX5LRe4FsVqdNR+JWAC X-Archives-Salt: edc122a8-371f-45d6-b2c3-1d347c8a123e X-Archives-Hash: e08578c73a89a0d2cd7ca247e60bd70e On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Markos Chandras wrote: > On 4 December 2012 01:18, Ben de Groot wrote: >> On 3 December 2012 03:30, Markos Chandras wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Dec 2, 2012 6:09 PM, "Rich Freeman" wrote: >>> > >>> > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM, hasufell wrote: >>> > > Only question is now what is a sane soft limit, before you go on and >>> > > fix >>> > > stuff. >>> > > From a discussion in #gentoo-dev we thought 2-4 weeks depending on the >>> > > severity of the bug is fine. Ofc this should exclude major changes or >>> > > delicate packages from base-system/core/toolchain. >>> > >>> > Seems reasonable - I'd say 2 weeks is plenty. Of course, if the >>> > maintainer explicitly rejects the change in a posting on the bug, then >>> > it is hands off without some kind of escalation. Non-maintainers who >>> > are concerned about a package can always step up to maintain, as long >>> > as it involves real commitment. >>> > >>> > Oh, and on a side note Markos raises a valid point on the bug about >>> > whether the devmanual is a good place for policy. The problem is that >>> > I'm not sure we really have a good place, especially with the ebuild >>> > docs gone in favor of the devmanual now. >>> > >>> > Rich >>> > >>> >>> Maybe adding some bits here[1] is preferred instead of the devmanual. >>> Unless we agree to make devmanual a technical and non-technical document, >>> which I personally don't like because it will end up being huge without some >>> sort of indexing/search textbox for quick queries. >>> >>> [1] >>> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2&chap=2 >> >> >> In my opinion we should limit the amount of places where we document >> policies and best practices. I suggest we keep only devmanual and PMS as >> authoritative documents. >> >> In that case we should go forward and add these kind of policies to the >> devmanual. >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> >> Ben | yngwin >> Gentoo developer >> Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin > > As I said, the only drawback is that devmanual will become huge and > without a proper "search" functionality, it will be a real pain to > search > for something quickly. Especially for new developers who are not > familiar with how devmanual is structured. "site:devmanual.gentoo.org " Works in bing, I tried it! It likely works in any modern search engine. > > -- > Regards, > Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 >