httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: Proposal: R-T-C and packaging files
Date Tue, 25 Jan 2005 01:26:38 GMT
At 08:28 AM 1/23/2005, Graham Leggett wrote:

>The packaging files are then fixed, but the backport sits in the STATUS file without enough
votes to move it forward, and eventually a release is made with broken packaging.

I think we discussed this at ApacheCon - an .rpm spec file,
.pkg description, or whatever should be considered a platform
issue - left to the platform maintainer and a handful of helpers
to maintain under lazy concensus.  Propose your fix, and let the
few who follow the issue pipe up if they like.

For a stable branch though - more often such changes should just
be -vetoed- instead of worked-around.  Packaging changes would
seem to signal breakage, not a reason for a workaround.

>What I propose is that changes to packaging files (such as build/rpm/httpd.spec.in, build/pkg/buildpkg.sh,
etc) should be CTR, just as documentation files are. This will not apply if other files (source
code for example) are involved in the change.

-1 not CTR.  Lazy consensus.  Propose, give 3 - 5 days (what
ever your schedule best provides) and then commit.  If folks
object they will speak up - if not - then you aren't hampered.

And documentation is (more often than not) R-T-C, at least in
terms of translations, etc.

Brad and I have operated that way for years.

Bill



Mime
View raw message