Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 9:44:41 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | On 5/9/2005 1:29:57, Ciaran McCreesh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > | > On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 1:12:54 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn" > | > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > | > wrote: > | > | 3) All packages need to be assigned an x86 arch team member > | > | responsible. > | > > | > Why? > | > | Because if only the x86 arch team can mark stuff stable, anything > | without representation on the x86 arch team will stay unstable > | forever. Maybe rather than one specific arch team member, several > | would undertake to manage otherwise unassigned packages. > > There are currently ~700 packages which are not visible to x86 or ~x86 > users. Do these need an x86 arch team member? Is it the aim of the x86 > arch team to cover the entire tree, or only things which are useful to > x86 users?
This is a good point... If nobody on x86 is using a given package, is there a need to worry about marking it ~x86/x86? This is how we handle things on the mips team -- that is, unless a user comes to us saying "Package foobar works on mips, can you please add ~mips for me", we normally don't worry about it. Maintaining keywords on _every_ package in the tree, IMHO would be a waste of effort unless there are a significant number of users actually using _every_ package in the tree. -- ____ _ Stuart Longland (a.k.a Redhatter) / _ \ ___ ___ __| |__ __ __ Gentoo Linux/MIPS Cobalt and Docs - (_) \ / \ ; \(__ __)/ \ / \ Developer \ // O _| / /\ \ | | | /\ | /\ | / / \ /__| / \ \ | | | \/ | \/ | (___/ \____/|_; |_| \_/ \__/ \__/ http://dev.gentoo.org/~redhatter
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
