On Tuesday 06 September 2005 16:28, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > I still think that the concept of a "maintainer arch" is completely > broken anyway. I like the idea of adding something like a "maint" > KEYWORD, or something similar to mark that the ebuild is considered > "stable" material by the maintainer. We can't rely on the maintainer > using *any* arch as their main architecture. Take myself, as an > example. The architecture I use when doing maintenance and adding new > packages is just whatever machine I happen to be using. It could be > x86, amd64, ppc, hppa, sparc, or mips, and there's no rhyme nor reason > to which I am using at any point in time. This is becoming a more > common occurrence that our developers have machines across many > architectures. Personally, I don't think this should be an added > KEYWORD, so much as a variable within the ebuild. I'd hate to start > seeing users filing bugs using "maint" as their "arch" or adding maint > to their USE flags. Just remember that if it is possible, somebody will > do it... ;]
I think those silly users could be handled similarly as those who use ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="*" or similar. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net
pgphQZRPCD0O5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
