On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:00:57 -0500
Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are other arch's also requiring peer review?
On SPARC, we normally keyword everything ourselves and get all up in
your hizzouze if you keyword something that you haven't asked us
about. We normally will let devs keywor
Mark Loeser wrote: [Mon Jun 05 2006, 03:25:02PM CDT]
> Well, since you decided to bring this up on here, I guess we'll just try
> to address everything.
Where else would I have brought this up? Paraphrasing, I noted that the
x86 team is now doing peer review, I asked if other arch teams are doing
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:00:57PM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> I maintain very few packages these days, so it was quite a surprise to
> me today when I discovered that peer review is now effectively a part of
> the x86 stabilization process. When I wrote GLEP 40, the problem that I
> was trying
Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I maintain very few packages these days, so it was quite a surprise to
> me today when I discovered that peer review is now effectively a part of
> the x86 stabilization process. When I wrote GLEP 40, the problem that I
> was trying to solve was that of d
I maintain very few packages these days, so it was quite a surprise to
me today when I discovered that peer review is now effectively a part of
the x86 stabilization process. When I wrote GLEP 40, the problem that I
was trying to solve was that of devs stabling packages without ever
testing the pa
