-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 11:11:17 -0400 "Nathan L. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | I do software development, systems integration, and bug squashing for > | a living. > > Gentoo's 'moving target' development model is not the development model > used by your typical 'stable release once or twice per year' large > software development project. >
Ah, how about this: Most of Gentoo's developers are concerned with Ebuilds (packaging if you will). A small subset of developers are concerned with Portage itself. Would have a *slightly* improved QA process on Portage development be such a bad thing/impossible. As I posted earlier, all I'm suggesting is *one* verification check by the Team Lead or the reporter before marking a bug as done. And Portage is arguably more stable and less fluid than the entirety of the ebuild tree. Nathan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCz/aK2QTTR4CNEQARApI1AKCH+XUcl4FR7xjZIK4V+GQPUFXoLACeJc5W M00736E0mlNtN7IqEqDh6wA= =Y9+n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
