On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 00:28 -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Sun, Oct 29, 2006 at 07:49:22PM -0700, Jason Wever wrote: > > Please triple check what you want to commit and verify that you don't do > > any of the following (which are punishable by death): > > > > 1) remove the last ebuild that is keyworded for a given arch, especially > > when resulting in broken dependencies. > > > > 2) remove the last stable ebuild for an architecture > > > > 3) remove the last testing ebuild for an architecture when there is no > > stable ebuild available after the removal > > To generalize on Francesco's email, how long should developers wait for > minority arches to mark stuff stable, after a security bug, and then a > reminder more than 4 months later? 5 months of no response from the > arches says something is wrong on their side. > I might be mistaken, but I believe sparc responds pretty quickly to security bugs, either by taking the requested action or by explaining why the requested action is impossible (i.e., build problems).
> I think that usage statistics might point out that there are nobody even > using these specific ebuilds that are proposed for removal. > Regards, -- Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Gentoo Linux (Devrel, Sparc)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
