On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 09:21:51PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/14/2014 09:09 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > > > > After the package has been sitting in ~arch for 90 days with an open > > stable request with no blockers that the arch team has not taken any > > action on. We are not talking about randomly yanking package versions, > > just doing something when arch teams are not responsive, and it seems > > that the cleanest thing to do would be to remove the old versions. > > > > People running stable value... stability. I would much rather wait for > the arch teams to get un-busy than to be forced to upgrade to something > untested. Why would I care if it takes another month? Strictly from a > user's perspective. I don't, unless I do, in which case I know that I > do, and I could just keyword the thing if I wanted to.
s/month/year/ Do you feel the same way then? I have heard of stabilizations taking this long before. I just had to try to pick something reasonable for the discussion. I suppose a compromise would be, instead of removing the old versions, move them back to ~arch for a month then remove them, but that still implies action on your part. William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
