Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 15:50 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
> Perhaps it is a few developers trying to actually enforce the council's
> decision and make sure that the 100% unofficial project doesn't *look*
> official.  Using "InOverlay" as if Sunrise is some sort of Gentoo
> official overlay is a prime example of this.  Let's look at it this way.
> If someone from Sunrise were to say "this ebuild is available in our
> overlay" in a comment, nobody would really have a problem.  Having
> someone with an @gentoo.org address setting "InOverlay" makes it look
> like Gentoo is endorsing the overlay.  Remember that when you use your
> @gentoo.org address, you're speaking for Gentoo in the user's eyes.
> Using "InOverlay" would be the same as someone from BMG (that happened
> to be a developer) doing it because it is in the BMG overlay.  It's
> simply not accurate.

It's exactly as accurate as the keyword description [1] is, i.e.:

<snip>
A case where someone is working on this maintained-needed ebuild in an
overlay to test their fixes before including it in an ebuild in the tree.
</snip>

So, be it BMG or sunrise or whatever else, it's an appropriate use of
that keyword, and there's nothing there suggesting that the overlay is
an official one.

[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/describekeywords.cgi



-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 GPG signature:
 http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature   ;)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to