On 07/11/2010 08:02 AM, Doug Goldstein wrote:

> If I really need to go to the council with every change, considering
> it must be debated on the ML for at least X number of days prior to
> going to the council, I'd more likely just remove MythTV from the tree
> and maintain it in an overlay. I don't invest a lot of time in the
> MythTV ebuilds, but they work for a large majority of people. And when
> a new version comes out it requires some retooling and it just works
> for everyone.

When someone proposes this I'll let you know. What's under discussion is
allowing removals to the public API of eclasses by following a
documented process (that doesn't involve council approval).

> So basically, you guys decide.. am I pulling them out of the tree or
> am I leaving them in?

If you decided to drop maintenance of MythTV in main tree, wouldn't it
be a better service to users to try and find a new maintainer (who would
possibly merge stuff from your overlay)?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to