Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
"Caleb Tennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If anyone has any examples of where they really are being held back
and where they really have given the arch teams plenty of time to do
something, I'd like to see them... Somehow I doubt it happens very
often, if at all.
Why? You aren't the person I or anyone else has to make a case to.
In fact, I never would have mailed the list about this to prevent
this very type of potentially-out-of-control discussion from
occurring, except that the e-mail from Mike said that discussion
topics needed to be sent to the list.
Ah, so you'd like the Council to jump to some arbitrary decision,
rather than hearing specific examples and evidence from all involved?
How will providing specific examples of how people are being held up
not be beneficial to the decision-making process?
First you have to acknowledge that old perpetually open bugs and old
unmaintained ebuilds are a maintenance burden. There seems to be a
consensus among maintainers that they are, but when given the examples
of xfce and media-* you responded that those are not a priority for the
archs in question. Well, that's nice, but they are for the maintainers
of those herds and that's what we're talking about. We're not actively
looking for ways to dump more work on the arch teams, but we're also
tired of having more work dumped on us. We're looking for a solution
that has both sides happy here, but that won't happen if you don't admit
there's a problem.
--
fonts, by design, by neglect
gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect
wxwindows @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
