[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] gtkmm-2.4.7
From:       foser <foser () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2004-11-28 22:39:34
Message-ID: 1101681574.30392.13.camel () rivendell
[Download RAW message or body]


On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 17:24 -0500, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> Which is why there should be a maintainer flag in metadata that states 
> whether a package is maintained or not, and if so, what arches the 
> maintainer has access to for testing.

I'm not sure metadata is fit, it might not apply to all ebuilds of a
package.

> Seeing as arch maintainers should generally coordinate with package 
> maintainers anyway, I don't see what the issue is here.

We're not talking 'generally' here, we're talking specifically. Sure,
the big changes get communicated about, but not every single package
bump/bugs gets notified to all arch teams, that is overdone anyway.
Realistically most of the time ebuilds themselves are the primary way of
communicating changes and that is not necessarily bad.

- foser

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]