On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 16:33:13 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | ok, e17 packages dont count here. however, your hardcore view i | still dont buy. how about the baselayout-1.9.x -> baselayout-1.11.x | stabilization process ? are you telling me that arch teams should | have had the power to move those into stable without talking to the | maintainer ? baselayout may be a core package, but if you continue | with your hard rule here, then it doesnt matter.
I'm saying that arch teams should be allowed to mark it stable if they think it's appropriate. Not that it must be moved to stable after $x days, but that it can be at the arch team's discretion. And any arch team which is silly enough to mark a broken baselayout stable has far bigger problems anyway... -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
pgpoCDjgI3nFt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
