On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 15:23:33 +0100 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > Feedback please. I advocate this approach for 'minor' packages, i.e. | > nothing fundamental to the working of the system. It's more suitable | > for scripting language libraries and minor applications (e.g. | > obscure window managers). | | A more appropriate option would be to allow users to test packages | that have not been marked as broken on their arg and then have a | policy that if at least two users have reported a package as stable, | and an arch dev can compile it it will be marked testing, and stable | if it has no problems within a reasonable time period.
This is basically how we do things for sparc already. For non-core packages with sane dependencies, if it is reported as working by a user (bugzilla or over irc) and it compiles then we'll usually keyword it up pretty quickly. This is how we handle a lot of the more obscure packages. "It works" reports are always welcomed :) -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web: http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
