On 11/03/2016 04:49 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 05:36:03PM -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: >> On Thursday, November 3, 2016 9:14:56 AM EDT William Hubbs wrote: > I have posted about this subject before, and I'll go and dust off the > proposal with the last changes added, when I have time soon hopefully. > >>> I am also in favor of the metadata approach. >> The only downfall is you end up with lots of package/developer specific >> policies which may become complex and a nuisance. It is likely better to >> have >> more of a global policy. > Sure, global policies help (as a sane default), but being able to tell > people the most common cases is important: > 1. Yes, touch it, but please ask me (DEFAULT, including timeout value) > 2. Yes, go ahead and touch this package, and don't ask me > 3. danger will robinson! this is fragile! > > I'm going to set #2 on the great majority of the 200+ packages that I > directly maintain. > > Make it easy to open a package up to MORE changes, and hard to restrict. >
+1 Doing a lot of tree wide cleanups, it is a pain to have to track down maintainers to ACK simple changes at scale (e.g., runscript->openrc-run). If a portion of the packages had a notation that I could poke without pinging, it would speed that up quite a bit. -- -Austin Austin English Gentoo Developer GPG: 00B3 2957 B94B F3E1
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
