On Fri, 2005-12-08 at 13:53 +0900, Chris White wrote: > I really do agree with not only this, but the need for stable marking > as well. Gentoo is very bleeding edge at this point, and I feel that > stable packages are somewhat lacking. However, the problems I see is > what is considered "Let the herd handle it" and what is considered > "sure why not". The script output should help, I'm just afraid that > if a person marks a package that the maintainer was planning on > working at, things could go wrong. I'm open to ideas on such a team, > but I'm not sure how to workout the major issues at this point.
I know this has been discussed before without coming to a conclusion. But we need a wait for package maintainers to notify their intent. Maybe adding a "maint" keyword that maintainers would add went they mark their package stable. Especially since there seem more and more maintainers whose primary arch is not x86.. or worse, who use more than one arch. The concept of maintainer arch does not seem very adequate anymore. Maybe we need to complete this with -maint and ~maint.. Those would serve as guidance to arch teams. -- Olivier Crête [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developer x86 Security Liaison -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
