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 1Eebxm-00009a-Jb for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 17:29:51 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAMHSSue012665; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 17:28:28 GMT Received: from smtp.top-hosting.cz (gw.top-hosting.cz [81.0.254.91]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAMHP7Ba013172 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 17:25:07 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.top-hosting.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id F11399A85B1 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:25:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.top-hosting.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.top-hosting.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 00786-05-2 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:25:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from NOTORCOMP (21.217.broadband4.iol.cz [85.71.217.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.top-hosting.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CBF99A85B3 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:25:02 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:24:55 +0100 From: Jakub Moc X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1875293312.20051122182455@gentoo.org> To: Chris Gianelloni Subject: Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] Decision to remove stage1/2 from installation documentation In-Reply-To: <1132677051.27288.37.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> References: <20051122144745.GR12982@mail.lieber.org> <1132672214.27288.14.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <43833F38.50609@gentoo.org> <1132677051.27288.37.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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; boundary="----------831E71DD262FE8BD" X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.3.3 (20050822) at top-hosting.cz X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.392 tagged_above=-999 required=6 tests=[AWL=0.013, SPF_NEUTRAL=1.379] X-Spam-Score: 1.392 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archives-Salt: 37c61607-48dd-4343-9ef6-ef23f83e02c2 X-Archives-Hash: 6658b455e19544f32596c462abae5a12 ------------831E71DD262FE8BD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0D=0A22.11.2005, 17:30:50, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 09:54 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote: > Also, the problem is not so much needing manpower for testing as far as > Release Engineering is concerned. It is instead having some method in > place where devs actually perform QA on their own packages. A prime > example of this is bug #110383. I was always under the impression that > if you were adding a flag to a package that affected "system" that it > was your responsibility to ensure that "system" still works, rather than > passing it off onto the Release Engineering team. Now, I don't know > what package it is that is pulling in hal for this user, so it most > likely is not hal's fault, but it illustrates the point perfectly. Blame vapier for that one ;p (Bug 99533 half-fixed for ~arch only); alternatively, you can blame usata for adding emacs support to gpm in the f= irst place (Bug 80217). --=20 jakub ------------831E71DD262FE8BD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32) iD8DBQFDg1RnhxfV/c66PZ4RAsOsAKCHDa5F2NI1VcUzkLloprNga1UrIwCeOY+m h3OFLy+HN7qTp85mkQCLysA= =++72 -----END PGP MESSAGE----- ------------831E71DD262FE8BD-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list