Re: [gentoo-dev] introduce a soft-limit policy for changing other developers ebuilds

[Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1373 bytes --]

On Dec 2, 2012 6:09 PM, "Rich Freeman" <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM, hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> 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

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1800 bytes --]