Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 01 March 2006 21:53, Mark Loeser wrote: >> Here is my updated version after some feedback from people: >> >> * In case of emergency, or if package maintainers refuse to cooperate, >> the QA team may take action themselves to fix the problem. >> * The QA team may also offer to fix obvious typos and similar minor >> issues, and silence from the package maintainers can be taken as >> agreement in such situations. >> * In the event that a developer still insists that a package does not >> break QA standards, an appeal can be made at the next council meeting. >> The package should be dealt with per QA's request until such a time that a >> decision is made by the council. > > one thing i dont think we give enough emphasis to is that our tools arent > perfect ... sometimes we utilize QA violations to work around portage > limitations ... if you want to see some really sweet hacks, review any of the > toolchain related ebuilds and the hacks ive had to add to get cross-compiling > to the usuable state that it is today. a handful of them would fall under > the 'severe' category i'm sure. and if we want to use the lovely php > example, personally i think that given portage's current limitations, the > latest dev-lang/php ebuild is probably one of the best solutions that could > have been developed, thanks Stuart for all the flak you've had to take over > this. also, many games ebuilds break the 'non-interactive' policy by > displaying licensing and making the user hit "Y" because portage lacks checks > where the user explicitly states what licenses they accept. > -mike
I installed dev-lang/php on a server in my house to test torrents.gentoo.org and ramereth also installed it on the torrents.g.o server. I have to say that it was a painless and normal operation with no errors. Thanks for the hard work on this ebuild, it's appreciated.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
