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 1N5zxj-0006Tr-UU for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:53:08 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 412A9E090A; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 10:53:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E011E090A for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 10:53:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B805C645CC for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 10:53:05 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.55 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.049, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id diKwY84h48yj for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 10:52:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07F0F67932 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 10:52:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1N5zxW-0002h3-Q3 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:52:54 +0100 Received: from ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.21.207]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:52:54 +0100 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:52:54 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 10:52:32 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <200911011736.38401.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <20091102151707.0b155aab@gentoo.org> <200911021724.01069.hwoarang@gentoo.org> <20091103191005.18d98e2e@gentoo.org> <4AF1EBD8.4020502@gentoo.org> <20091104214823.64842abd@gentoo.org> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 4b4f65e1-7b54-4eb6-8cf7-60064c7a2dbe X-Archives-Hash: 8ba2b3ae152a2c6d090cf0e7301ccf8d Ryan Hill posted on Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:48:23 -0600 as excerpted: > Is there any interest in allowing certain packages to be stabilized by > the maintainer without going through the arch teams? I always feel > guilty when i file stabilization bugs for app-doc pkgs. Weren't there already arrangements for this in some cases? I distinctly=20 recall a thread on it some time ago, with the conclusion being that=20 various maintainers can get permission from the arch teams to keyword=20 their own packages. Now that was in the /general/ context of having access to the arch either= =20 directly/personally or thru available testing resource machines, but (as=20 klausman accounts for in his post) that really doesn't apply to (for=20 example) docs packages that don't require fancy build-chains or (with=20 some sanity margin) where the build chain dependencies have been long=20 stable, so "required testing resources" are virtually zero. Thus, I'd say it's probably an extension of the previous arrangement --=20 but of course that does still require an initial one-time permission=20 grant per arch, either per-package, or depending on arch/pkg-maintainer=20 trust level, possible per category or similar. --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman