[csw-maintainers] commentary on shared library naming proposal

[Peter FELECAN]

"Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski" <maciej at opencsw.org> writes:

> No dia 16 de Novembro de 2010 14:19, Sebastian Kayser
> <skayser at opencsw.org> escreveu:
>> * Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> 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