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 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Hgkk1-0004iX-6H for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:53:17 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l3PGpqt8007430; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:51:52 GMT Received: from mail.twi-31o2.org (66-191-187-123.dhcp.gnvl.sc.charter.com [66.191.187.123]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l3PGnL7B004085 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:49:21 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.twi-31o2.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAA372482F0 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:38:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.twi-31o2.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gravity.twi-31o2.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28430-05 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:38:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from draco (draco.twi-31o2.org [192.168.0.12]) by mail.twi-31o2.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FECE2480E2 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:38:13 -0400 (EDT) From: "Chrissy Fullam" To: References: <200704242111.44663.kugelfang@gentoo.org><200704242154.20811.kugelfang@gentoo.org><462E6CC4.5000408@gentoo.org><200704242311.46269.kugelfang@gentoo.org><462E71E1.7000704@gentoo.org><9fce88250704242355n3744e592p303fa81c4f9b55f7@mail.gmail.com><1177517569.15811.61.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <20070425172134.6a20b841@snowflake> Subject: RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: [ANN] Multiple version suffixes illegal in gentoo-x86 Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:49:23 -0400 Message-ID: <19752B75DE9A41308625C041678C2E6A@twi31o2.org> 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: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <20070425172134.6a20b841@snowflake> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.3959 Thread-Index: AceHVn2/PwIYPL8/Qoqh9hrLUdl+LgAAbdJw X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at twi-31o2.org X-Archives-Salt: a2532691-9324-49b3-ba26-311b9bdf7810 X-Archives-Hash: 986e926ec4fd0d19b823892d80e29e44 On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:12:49 -0400 Chris Gianelloni wrote: > I don't understand how nobody can see that the *TEMPORARY* injunction > against packages using this versioning scheme was put into place > *BECAUSE* nobody could agree on the solution. On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:22 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >Mmm, no, what's weird is that you did it about two days after a solution was found... How is this conversation even relevant to development anymore? It sounds more policy, well questioning authority, and that is clearly meant for another ML. Can we please move on past the "how did the council decide to make this decision" and the "why did the council make this decision?" Try gentoo-council@gentoo.org for answers to those questions, after all, anyone can be on that ML so it's not like its going to be 'closed door' information. A more appropriate discussion for here would be "what do we do to start working with this decision?" Regards, Chrissy Fullam -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list