On 2/11/20 12:32 PM, Francesco Riosa wrote:
>
>
> Il giorno lun 10 feb 2020 alle ore 08:20 Michał Górny
> <mgo...@gentoo.org <mailto:mgo...@gentoo.org>> ha scritto:
>
>     On Sun, 2020-02-09 at 22:51 -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
>     > In that case, I suppose we'll have to apply consistency
>     manually? Can we
>     > all agree on a global order of preference for the relevant packages?
>
>     That would be my idea, yes.  I'd suggest going for the 'lightest'
>     package first.  Would you be able to figure out some kind of measure
>     on how heavy each of those packages is?  I suppose we need to account
>     for build time and dependencies.
>
> All of these packages are pretty old and not receiving commits in
> years, may I suggest that the order should be from the less prone to
> break to the most prone to break?

How do you determine this?


> I'll leave to maintainers decide on how to assign a vote on resilience,

Ah. So no.


Whats wrong with simply sorting by alphabetic order? Elinks seems a fine
default for those who don't care enough to change it.


-- juippis

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to