Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 15:06:07 -0700 > Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> - arch-specific patches/dependencies - If someone is requesting >> KEYWORD changes on a package and it requires a patch or additional >> dependencies for your architecture, you are not only permitted, but >> really are required to make the necessary changes to add support for >> your architecture. > > arch-specific patches are almost always wrong. The last thing people > need is to come along and find some arch developer has applied a bad > arch-specific patch without asking first... > Thing is, in such a case, the maintainer isn't going to be using the arch (or s/he'd have applied it already.) If there's a problem with the patch _on that arch_ (where else is it going to show up) the arch team (or the dev who applied it) is responsible for any bugs.
If there's a problem with getting the bugs assigned to that team, it's a different issue (which needs to be resolved ofc.) You seem to be saying that arch teams are deliberately going to apply "bad patches" which makes no sense. If they do it's a QA and, ultimately, a devrel issue aiui. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
