Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 11:57:37 -0500 Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| I picked a random e-mail to reply to. I don't maintain that many
| packages (maybe 10 or so?). But if I have a bug (particularly a sec
| bug as in this case) and you haven't stablized it after five months
| then I'll probably just nuke the ebuild and drop your keywords
Which is dumb. There's no harm to be had in just leaving the ebuild
there.
I'm just trying to make my life as an ebuild maintainer easier. This
means some individuals may file bugs against an old crusty version of a
package that I maintain because $arch hasn't keyworded a newer version
yet. Then I have to tell the user that they are using a crusty old
version and to use a newer one. Double bonus if they are actually using
said $arch and need to keyword the newer version themselves.
I'll admit I've never had to drop keywords on anything thus far; I'm
merely stating what I would do in such a situation. Your point prior
was that you weren't asking maintainers to maintain anything extra, but
to leave the old ebuilds in place for the given $arches. The small
issue is that ebuilds in place imply maintainership; even if it's just
to tell the user to use a newer version.
On the topic of old ebuilds; situations may arise where a particular
maintainer is trying to clean out a version of a package but finds that
$arch doesn't have anything newer stable and thus can't do any sort of
cleanup for fear of breaking $arch.
You will probably again state that maintainer should just leave the
older versions around. I will state that at least as a maintainer I'm
willing to do so for only a limited period of time. Otherwise it
becomes an annoyance when trying to clean up after packages to have
ebuilds from three or four minor versions ago lying around.
So we disagree on this point. Thats ok too I think ;)
-Alec Warner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
