28.01.2014 20:33, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." пишет:
> Here's a proposal that may address concerns from the long "rfc:
> revisiting our stabilization policy" thread.
>
> It seems at least one of the problems is that with old ebuilds being
> stable on slow arches but not the more recent ebuilds, it is a
>
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 08:33:05 -0800
> ""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
>
>> Why not allow maintainers to drop redundant stable and even ~arch
>> keywords from their packages?
>
> This is standard practice already.
If there is still pain then m
On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 08:33:05 -0800
""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
> Why not allow maintainers to drop redundant stable and even ~arch
> keywords from their packages?
This is standard practice already.
jer
On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 08:33:05 -0800
""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
> Why not allow maintainers to drop redundant stable and even ~arch
> keywords from their packages?
We already do that to a great extent; only removing the last keyword
present is a bad idea, because in that case the package would n
On 28/01/14 11:33 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> Here's a proposal that may address concerns from the long "rfc:
> revisiting our stabilization policy" thread.
>
> It seems at least one of the problems is that with old ebuilds being
> stable on slow arches but not the more recent ebuilds, it is
