On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 17:25 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 14:47 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 09:13 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > > > > Just because the maintaining *project* doesn't > > > want it doesn't mean it doesn't belong to that herd. > > > > This is incorrect and you should not encourage people to add pkgs to > > a herd unless they get permission from that herd. If a herd does not > > want it you shall not shit in their home (it's rude). > > A herd doesn't *want* anything. It is a group of packages. Perhaps you > mean a maintaining project?
Nope not at all see below. > > > When a package lists a herd then the responsibility is shared > > among the maintainer and the herd. > > Only if someone didn't list themselves as the maintainer, which would be > wrong. Just because the games team doesn't maintain something doesn't > mean it isn't a game anymore. I think you are confusing a category/ vs a herd. But in the case of games@ only we can take your note and keep it in mind when adding new packages to the tree to go ahead and slap a games@ on it. But sorry not the rest of the tree. -- Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Linux -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
