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

List:       gentoo-proxy-maint
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-proxy-maint] Has there been any conversation about ~usercontrib keyword?
From:       Philippe Chaintreuil <gentoo_bugs_peep () parallaxshift ! com>
Date:       2019-06-13 19:11:58
Message-ID: 9a76ff9f-9ea4-d60a-4e80-8ba4d9dfd79e () parallaxshift ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 6/13/2019 12:27 PM, Haelwenn (lanodan) Monnier wrote:
> This makes little sense to do when GURU exists… and the keyword should
> IMHO be into metadata.xml.
> And so, you get the same as proxy-maint@, right?
>
> If this is about the lack of workforce for merging proxy-maint PRs
> then maybe it should by moving stuff to GURU as it's not on the same
> QA level and model? Specially as I don't think we should lower the QA
> level of the gentoo tree.

	My understanding is that GURU only exists for packages that don't exist
in the primary tree.  So it addresses the new-package backlog, but not
the version bump backlog for packages that exist in the primary tree.

	A separate tree for version bumps probably creates it's own issues
though, since revisions would probably start conflicting.  (Gentoo: -r3;
User Improves: -r4; Gentoo doesn't accept -r4, but needs to issue an
unrelated -r4 => conflict.)

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