"Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski" <[email protected]> writes: > No dia 16 de Novembro de 2010 14:19, Sebastian Kayser > <[email protected]> escreveu: >> * Philip Brown <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I will also mention, given that Maciej gave the debian sharedlibs >>> policy (section 8.1) as a reference, if we abided by the WHOLE text of >>> that section. Again, my further notes on that, are at the bottom of >>> the wiki page. >> >> When it comes to policy vs "when seen beneficial" in this case, I regard >> it as helpful to have as few exceptions and as much of a standard as >> possible. > > There's also the question of who is the subject to see the benefit. > Is it the maintainer or the release manager? What if the two > disagree? Is it reasonable for the release manager to reject a > split-off package even though the maintainer sees it as beneficial and > the package follows the naming scheme?
This reminds me that we strongly agreed, at the summer summit (sorry to raise again a subject discussed at that time), that we don't need a "release manager" per see; the transition from experimental to testing to unstable to stable can be done almost automatically, based on standards, tools that enforce those standards and *maintainers* community agreement. -- Peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
