This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: New version of nfs-server for review

On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 01:27:21PM -0500, Daniel Reed wrote:
>[To the list] Should it become policy for all proposed packages to be
>uploaded under "test" once they have received the required votes, and then
>just moved to "curr" once they have had all problems resolved and received a
>"good to go"?
>Packages that have a more selective user base (and hence a limited number of
>people to perform a functionality review) could be "in the system" sooner.
>Additionally, it may open up the review process to more package maintainers
>who do not actively follow cygwin-apps, but might notice new Test packages.
>If a pending package has packaging problems, premature propogation could
>cause chaos on a wider scale. Currently "Test" seems to imply the
>functionality is all that is at question, not the packaging itself. I cringe
>to propose an even more drastic change, but perhaps a fourth category could
>be created specifically for pending packages.

I don't think you can make a general rule about this.  Both the Pros and the
Cons are pretty compelling so I think that we should consider allowing this
in some cases but only on a case by case basis.

I wouldn't mind doing this in this specific case, though.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]