On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:12:56 +0200 Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | > Well, if it's in ~arch it's a candidate to go to stable after | > further testing. If a package maintainer isn't prepared to have a | > package moved to stable, they shouldn't take it out of package.mask. | | The 30 days are just a rule, there are enough packages which surely | need a longer testing period, even if they work flawlessly. Or would | you mark gcc 4.0 stable after 30 days? I think that's what Paul | wanted to say.
For that, I'd point you at the devmanual version of keywording policy, which is a hell of a lot better written and includes an explicit remark about core system components needing a lot more than 30 days. http://dev.gentoo.org/~plasmaroo/devmanual/keywording/ Plus for stuff like gcc, it's very much an arch decision, not a package maintainer decision. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
pgp54tvvRBLYy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
