On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 08:11 +0100, Roy Marples wrote: > On Wed, 2 May 2007 22:00:05 +0100 > Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What, people deliberately breaking policy that directly leads to > > breaking stable and not having any working ebuilds for a package in > > the tree, and then refusing to do anything about it is nothing? > > > > > the issue has been taken care of > > > > You have a conflict of interest in this one. What do other Council > > members who aren't games team members think? > > > > > [to the detriment of users] > > > > How is not having broken packages committed straight to stable > > detrimental to users? > > I maintain and play a game called Eternal Lands. I'm a Council member, > but not part of the games team/herd. > > One of the problems games have with stable/unstable/testing/whatever > keywords is that upstream changes things that in any other application > just would not change. For example, the network protocol when talking > to servers. EL is very version specific and when a new client is > launched, around once every 6 months they change over right away. That > means our users need the game right away.
ok, agreed, this is a valid point. so i would suggest, that maintainers of games where this argument applies, come to special agreements with the arch teams - or just file bugreports like this: " although games-foo/lord-of-bar-2.4.6 has just been bumped, i would like to have it stable real soon, as upstream has changed the network protocol. i have x86 and amd64 hardware available, and can confirm, that the game works nice there; so, if no one objects, i'm gonna mark lord-of-bar-2.4.6 stable on x86 and amd64 in two days. i would also like to have a shiny sparc keyword, but have no hardware to test. so it would be highly appreciated if someone from the sparc team can give the game a try. " but committing straight to stable on arches where the package wasn't even tested is an absolute no-do for me. > DISCLAIMER: I've not read the bug mentioned as I've lost the email > with it's number so I may just be talking out of my ass. no, in fact you are the first one that comes up with a valid argument, why games sometimes should go to stable almost immediately. sad, but true... -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
