On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 20:15 +0100, Stuart Herbert wrote: > Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > Here's another example of it done correctly. If you add a game to the > > tree, the herd should be listed as games. Period. Even if you are > > going to be the sole maintainer of the package, games should be the > > herd. Why? Because it is a game, silly. > > There _is_ no requirement that a package must belong to a herd. It's very > good advice, and it's good for Gentoo, but it's _not_ a requirement. I'm > sorry, but I think in this case what you are asserting isn't correct.
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/metastructure/herds/#doc_chap4 Specifically the listing for the herd tag. Just because people are doing things *wrong* doesn't mean that there isn't a defined manner in which things should be done. > When I say I don't believe, I mean that I'm not aware of any Gentoo rule > giving project leads any such dominion.I don't believe being the lead of any > project (be it games, webapps, or anything else) gives _anyone_ the > automatic right to suppress packages that you're not going to maintain - > subject to the due diligence about dangerous packages and unmaintained > packages that I mentioned earlier in this thread. I believe that this is a > right that you are claiming for yourself; I'm sure you're doing so with good > intentions. Here's where you start making wild assumptions. Who ever said that we don't intend on maintaining *every* ebuild that gets submitted to us? You are starting to put words into my mouth and making claims that I'm not making. Stop. > You've raised a lot of valid concerns about the plans of Project Sunrise, > but here I think you're asking for too much, by trying to assert dominion > over what simply isn't yours to control. The bugs is assigned to the games team. Should I go and simply ACCEPT every single bug assigned to games in bugzilla, including all of the bug spam that will be caused by it, just to show that we *have* accepted these bugs, and are simply working through them at our own pace? > It's reasonable (and existing Gentoo practice) to say "hands off - we > maintain that package". Correct. > Saying "hands off, but we are not going to maintain that package either" ... > it may be good for you, but I can't see how it's good for Gentoo - unless > the package is dangerous. I never said this. Please don't try to use things that I never said as an argument, especially putting them in quotes, as if to quote me. You'll only serve to piss me off. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
