Il giorno gio, 18/08/2011 alle 11.15 +0200, Thomas Sachau ha scritto: > > The argument about dropped tarballs, once the ebuilds gets removed > might weight a bit more, but you > cannot depend on other upstream keeping their tarballs around forever, > so i see no requirement for > us preserving only specific tarballs (those created by our devs), > while upstream tarballs could > already be gone and are not preserved, once the ebuild for it is gone.
Perfect is the enemy of good. _Most_ upstream projects keep tarballs available of all historic releases; okay maybe not _all_ projects, but most, especially those using services such as SourceForge, Google Code, RubyForge, Rubygems, ... For _our_ projects, snapshots, or packages, let's try to apply a sane policy. And that starts by not arguing that we shouldn't be doing so because others might not be doing so themselves. Heck, let's try to look up for the projects doing things right, not justify our failures with those doing things wrong. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
