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 4.50) id 1ENrNs-0000ks-43 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2005 12:31:32 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j97CL75D003485; Fri, 7 Oct 2005 12:21:07 GMT Received: from smtp04.gnvlscdb.sys.nuvox.net (smtp.nuvox.net [64.89.70.9]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j97CIE7T031120 for ; Fri, 7 Oct 2005 12:18:14 GMT Received: from cgianelloni.nuvox.net (216.215.202.4.nw.nuvox.net [216.215.202.4]) by smtp04.gnvlscdb.sys.nuvox.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id j97CS8Lu004602 for ; Fri, 7 Oct 2005 08:28:09 -0400 Received: by cgianelloni.nuvox.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 7 Oct 2005 08:25:11 -0400 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Scratching of GLEP22 From: Chris Gianelloni To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200510070003.56151@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> References: <200510070003.56151@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-EwCz0iitRNu9lorvjQrR" Organization: Gentoo Linux Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 08:25:10 -0400 Message-Id: <1128687911.8881.22.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail 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: ad30b83d-0784-432e-b80d-3b8b474196fc X-Archives-Hash: bb51c3f69e78aae5d06aa00c73b44c97 --=-EwCz0iitRNu9lorvjQrR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2005-10-07 at 00:03 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten=C3=B2 wrote: > For this reason I'd like to ask the retirement by scratch of GLEP22.. hop= e=20 > you'll let me do that without having to write a GLEP that removes a GLEP=20 > (it's recursive...) Wouldn't it make more sense to get with the GLEP authors and propose a revision of the GLEP, since the concept is still the same "Gentoo ALT KEYWORDS", to make it fit better with the current situation? --=20 Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux --=-EwCz0iitRNu9lorvjQrR 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 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDRmkmkT4lNIS36YERAoAUAKCg877+N+PMnt3dDoe1XADJsWHDOACgqNzm oaMO4i6LUOayeWMSfjPz2Lo= =k0O2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-EwCz0iitRNu9lorvjQrR-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list