On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 17:58:51 -0700
Matt Turner wrote:
> I'm not sure what this is in reference to so it seems to be a
> non-sequitur, but I like the policy of at least waiting a day for
> review of non-critical fixes. Phrased another way, let people in every
> timezone have a chance.
Its not
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 5:37 PM Kent Fredric wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:37:28 +0200
> Piotr Karbowski wrote:
>
> > This is a bit unhealthy, especially when some developers that maintain
> > packages are out of reach, or the patches to update ebuild just rot on
> > the bugzilla and are not
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 10:37 AM Piotr Karbowski wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to bring the topic of defining default policy to do changes to
> packages within ::gentoo that one does not maintain.
>
> This topic goes back from time to time on #gentoo-dev, and as I was
> told, it was originally sent
On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:37:28 +0200
Piotr Karbowski wrote:
> This is a bit unhealthy, especially when some developers that maintain
> packages are out of reach, or the patches to update ebuild just rot on
> the bugzilla and are not taken in by maintainers.
IME this is far from the norm and
On 19-10-21 19:37:28, Piotr Karbowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to bring the topic of defining default policy to do changes to
> packages within ::gentoo that one does not maintain.
>
> This topic goes back from time to time on #gentoo-dev, and as I was
> told, it was originally sent to
Hi,
I'd like to bring the topic of defining default policy to do changes to
packages within ::gentoo that one does not maintain.
This topic goes back from time to time on #gentoo-dev, and as I was
told, it was originally sent to gentoo-dev mailing list by robbat2 (I
failed to find this in
