В Вск, 28/03/2010 в 07:47 +0200, Maciej Mrozowski пишет: > No, seriously - given the fact that some of my packages were even stabilized > without contacting me (app-misc/hal-cups-utils, app-admin/system-config- > printer-common)
If you know packages are broken why they were not hardmasked? If they have no problems what why it was bad idea to mark them stable? > * solely up to the package maintainers to stabilize application on arches > they're using or on any arch if package is arch-agnostic (optionally, but > preferably with some peer review from other project members or arch team > members). In general package maintainer should avoid to stabilize the packages he worked on as one of the arch team's goal was to have second eyes on package before it goes stable. > Role of arch teams would be decreased to peer review and solving KEYWORD > requests. > > It's really freaking silly to wait months for stabilization of some random > php/perl library that's known to work. Why wait? amd64 team requested help and every developer who tested package on stable profile is allowed to mark package stable. For rare archs it's possible configure search filters to avoid stabilization requests. -- Peter.
