-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
On Monday 06 June 2005 23:26, Aron Griffis wrote:
I am willing to revert the ekeyword change if that is what devs would
prefer, but I won't make the change without a discussion on -dev,
which was my mistake last time. Your thoughts?
I also vote for alpha. I would like to see some indication of maintainer arch
in metadata too, but in general agree with the policy of if one arch
stabilises then we can assume that is the maintainer arch.
I also like alpha, but that is not what I am responding to. And I have to
admit that I haven't followed this too closely. But the "if one arch
stabalises..." assumption can be misleading. For example, xorg-x11
maintainer arch is x86 (spyderous will correct me if I am wrong), but I
know of at least once instance in which sparc (and a few other archs) were
stable ahead of x86.
Granted, spyderous knew what was going on and why, but for a few days
there, the "stabilises" rule of thumb with nothing more would have led the
unsuspecting reader to believe that maintainer arch for xorg was sparc.
Of course, as a guide, this rule will generally be correct. Just not all
the time.
Thanks,
Marcus
--
Gentoo Linux Developer
Scientific Applications | AMD64 | KDE | net-proxy
Regards,
Ferris
- --
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Developer, Gentoo Linux (sparc)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCpijLQa6M3+I///cRAncRAJoClQEQwcwz0Ge6LiasRHw+3fV98wCgiKv+
BCO59gjXoUvdFzeUJvoJ23A=
=5KRh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
