On 11/24/11 6:12 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
I support stabilizing bug-free newer versions of maintainer-needed
packages that already have stable versions. I'm not sure I'd extend
that to stabilizing packages that have no stable versions already.
[...]
Those benefits don't exist for a package
On 11/23/11 3:27 PM, Torsten Veller wrote:
What do you expect to happen with bugs assigned to maintainer-needed?
I'm going to CC arches myself after a while, similarly as with bugs with
other maintainers who don't respond.
I don't know if any of the packages is really good to be stabilized.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 24/11/11 10:17 AM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
On 11/23/11 3:27 PM, Torsten Veller wrote:
What do you expect to happen with bugs assigned to maintainer-needed?
I'm going to CC arches myself after a while, similarly as with bugs with
other
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
.should ~arch packages with no maintainer really be moved to stable?*
(* assuming no other outside forces, like it's a dep of something else
that needs to go stable)
I support stabilizing bug-free newer versions of
El jue, 24-11-2011 a las 12:12 -0500, Rich Freeman escribió:
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
.should ~arch packages with no maintainer really be moved to stable?*
(* assuming no other outside forces, like it's a dep of something else
that needs to
* Paweł Hajdan, Jr. phajdan...@gentoo.org:
Please review the list, it's 800+ packages so I thought about asking for
feedback before filing stabilization bugs (I plan to do that in stages
of course).
What do you expect to happen with bugs assigned to maintainer-needed?
I don't know if any of
