On 07/11/2010 08:02 AM, Doug Goldstein wrote: > If I really need to go to the council with every change, considering > it must be debated on the ML for at least X number of days prior to > going to the council, I'd more likely just remove MythTV from the tree > and maintain it in an overlay. I don't invest a lot of time in the > MythTV ebuilds, but they work for a large majority of people. And when > a new version comes out it requires some retooling and it just works > for everyone. >
When someone proposes this I'll let you know. What's under discussion is allowing removals to the public API of eclasses by following a documented process (that doesn't involve council approval). > So basically, you guys decide.. am I pulling them out of the tree or > am I leaving them in? > If you decided to drop maintenance of MythTV in main tree, wouldn't it be a better service to users to try and find a new maintainer (who would possibly merge stuff from your overlay)? Regards, Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
