On 10/11/2011 08:38 AM, Peter Volkov wrote: > В Вск, 09/10/2011 в 22:28 +0000, Duncan пишет: >> Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn posted on Sun, 09 Oct 2011 18:37:59 +0200 as >> excerpted: >> >>> Duncan schrieb: >>>> Libpng isn't held up that way, while the package still gets its 30 day >>>> masking last-rites. No policy broken; no maintainer toes stepped on as >>>> a result of the broken policy. No more nasty threads about (this) >>>> broken policy and unhappy maintainers as a result! =:^) >>> >>> Actually removing a package that doesn't violate any (written) rules >>> without maintainer consensus could be considered a violation of policy >>> too. >>> >>> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/recruiters/mentor.xml Respect >>> existing maintainers: >>> Never commit when someone else has clear ownership. Never commit on >>> things with unclear ownership until you've tried to clear it up. > > Samuli pretends here to act as a part of QA team (although he is not). > Actually even whiteboard of stabilization bug tells #at _earliest_ 17 > Oct" and thus there is really no sign for rush. This is the case where > QA should voice and either explain why fast stabilization of libpng is > so important or stop policy breakage. That said it became really common > to break our own policies (with no attempts to amend policy).
(sorry for replying to same mail again, but I've missed the baseless claim for fast stabilization) no such thing, as 17 Oct is 30 day from when libpng-1.5 was released to ~arch -- notice it was me who added the whiteboard status too, so arches DON'T stabilize it fast.
