El lun, 07-04-2014 a las 08:37 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
[...]
I agree, this is the best solution, something like
automaticstableno/automaticstable that can
then be parsed by whatever scripts.
I could work with that, and to ease that, I believe it should be part of
the default
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/02/2014 02:22 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
The 30 days maintainer time out stabilization policy isn't working
when package has multiple SLOTs, because
the bugs are filed
On 07/04/14 01:57, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina wrote:
On 04/02/2014 02:22 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Samuli Suominen
ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
The 30 days maintainer time out stabilization policy isn't working
when package has multiple SLOTs, because
the bugs
On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 04:30:20PM +0400, Mikle Kolyada wrote:
02.04.2014 20:52, Samuli Suominen пишет:
The 30 days maintainer time out stabilization policy isn't working
when package has multiple SLOTs, because
the bugs are filed for only latest SLOT, where as some packages require
El mié, 02-04-2014 a las 14:22 -0400, Mike Gilbert escribió:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
The 30 days maintainer time out stabilization policy isn't working
when package has multiple SLOTs, because
the bugs are filed for only latest SLOT,
02.04.2014 20:52, Samuli Suominen пишет:
The 30 days maintainer time out stabilization policy isn't working
when package has multiple SLOTs, because
the bugs are filed for only latest SLOT, where as some packages require
stabilization in sync at both SLOTs
Option 1:
Either revert the
The 30 days maintainer time out stabilization policy isn't working
when package has multiple SLOTs, because
the bugs are filed for only latest SLOT, where as some packages require
stabilization in sync at both SLOTs
Option 1:
Either revert the whole policy, and never CC arches on unanswered bugs
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
The 30 days maintainer time out stabilization policy isn't working
when package has multiple SLOTs, because
the bugs are filed for only latest SLOT, where as some packages require
stabilization in sync at both SLOTs
On 02/04/14 21:22, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
The 30 days maintainer time out stabilization policy isn't working
when package has multiple SLOTs, because
the bugs are filed for only latest SLOT, where as some packages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
I'm just not sure what any of the randomly filed stablereqs are for.
It doesn't help anyone, unless the guy who filed it actually uses it
or if it is a blocker for another stabilization.
It's annoying me for some time now. I expect maintainers to
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:28 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'm just not sure what any of the randomly filed stablereqs are for.
It doesn't help anyone, unless the guy who filed it actually uses it
or if it is a blocker for another stabilization.
It's annoying me for some time now. I
Dnia 2014-04-02, o godz. 19:28:30
hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
I'm just not sure what any of the randomly filed stablereqs are for.
It doesn't help anyone, unless the guy who filed it actually uses it
or if it is a blocker for another stabilization.
It's annoying me for some
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote:
On the packages I maintain, I tend to use the latest unstable version
of the software. Stabilizing them rarely crosses my mind.
I rather like the semi-automated reminders. They come in handy for my
own packages, as well as
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Ok, noted that other people like to have those reminders.
Rich Freeman:
Another option might be to have a tag in metadata.xml that flags
packages as never-stable or indicating that stabilization requires
coordination, which might help with
On 02/04/14 04:02 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
Another option might be to have a tag in metadata.xml that flags
packages as never-stable
Arguments have been made that such packages do not belong in g-x86.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Alex Xu:
On 02/04/14 04:02 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
Another option might be to have a tag in metadata.xml that flags
packages as never-stable
Arguments have been made that such packages do not belong in
g-x86.
I did understand it the way
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Alex Xu alex_y...@yahoo.ca wrote:
On 02/04/14 04:02 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
Another option might be to have a tag in metadata.xml that flags
packages as never-stable
Arguments have been made that such packages do not belong in g-x86.
Why not? In general I
On 04/03/2014 12:52 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
The 30 days maintainer time out stabilization policy isn't working
when package has multiple SLOTs, because
the bugs are filed for only latest SLOT, where as some packages require
stabilization in sync at both SLOTs
Question: Why is the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/04/14 03:28 PM, hasufell wrote:
I'm just not sure what any of the randomly filed stablereqs are
for. It doesn't help anyone, unless the guy who filed it actually
uses it or if it is a blocker for another stabilization.
It's annoying me
19 matches
Mail list logo
