From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
	by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EGO10-0003gs-99
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:45:02 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8GLcZXe030911;
	Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:38:35 GMT
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8GLaEbw000224
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:36:14 GMT
Received: from dsl-082-083-222-234.arcor-ip.net ([82.83.222.234] helo=[10.0.0.13])
	by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EGNxT-0003uv-68
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:41:23 +0000
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] first council meeting
From: Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
In-Reply-To: <20050916223433.250ef25c@snowdrop.home>
References: <20050915205149.GB22270@vino.zko.hp.com>
	 <200509162217.26369.carlo@gentoo.org>
	 <20050916213838.1e7f65d7@snowdrop.home>
	 <200509162323.40674.carlo@gentoo.org>
	 <20050916223433.250ef25c@snowdrop.home>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-/rMgNqFKXOy/82rlFESv"
Organization: Gentoo
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:41:21 +0200
Message-Id: <1126906881.24186.3.camel@localhost>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 
X-Archives-Salt: c8f6ef72-423f-4fb5-b1b6-d8967e67ea3a
X-Archives-Hash: 1af43757400de896a4c34abdb369bab2


--=-/rMgNqFKXOy/82rlFESv
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 2005-09-16 at 22:34 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > There is a difference between using package.mask and ~arch for
> > ebuilds. The use of ~arch denotes an ebuild requires testing. The use
> > of package.mask denotes that the application or library itself is
> > deemed unstable.
> | Second: a) and b) doesn't match what's going on with large parts of
> | the tree=20
>=20
> Good time for package maintainers to start following policy properly,
> eh?
Good time for policy to be adapted to match reality ;-)

--=20
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move

--=-/rMgNqFKXOy/82rlFESv
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBDKzwBqER3hOUoZM4RAju3AJ9SkV33MAngPJlkQaMYsiI3UL2CbACfQ/T2
lTDH2RvBMwouqo74YJFp4B4=
=MeQ1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-/rMgNqFKXOy/82rlFESv--

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list