Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 12:46 +0100, Andres Loeh wrote:
> As I've said, my only request is a single policy that before an overlay > can become publicly readable on overlays.gentoo.org (which is Gentoo > infrastructure) that it does not break packages in the main tree that > are not in the overlay. > > If this single policy were in place, then I would fully support > overlays.gentoo.org being created. How are you going to enforce that policy? Heh, you can't do that preemptively even in the main tree. :) Every day there are bugs about package A upgrade breaking packages B, C and D. I can also create an overlay with two completely innocent ebuilds, get it opened and then keep filing it w/ ricer food like patched-to-hell toolchain stuff? How are you going to verify that ebuild X in overlay doesn't break anything in the tree? And that its next revision won't do it. You volunteer for such job? Great. Or not? Well, then there's no point in suggesting a policy that can just never work... So - what you are telling us is that you *assume* that people are going to publish ebuilds *known* to break in-portage stuff on overlays.g.o.? Weird assumption really... :/ -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
