From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-dev-return-13900-arch-gentoo-dev=gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org> Received: (qmail 14625 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2004 18:06:02 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 9 Jul 2004 18:06:02 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bizl2-000273-LN for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2004 18:06:00 +0000 Received: (qmail 23043 invoked by uid 89); 9 Jul 2004 18:06:00 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@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 Received: (qmail 15647 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2004 18:05:59 +0000 Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 20:05:54 +0200 From: Spider <spider@gentoo.org> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-Id: <20040709200554.5df46f91.spider@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <40EED968.1090208@swat.me.uk> References: <40EED968.1090208@swat.me.uk> Organization: Gentoo.org X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.9-gtk2-20040229 (GTK+ 2.4.3; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; boundary="Signature=_Fri__9_Jul_2004_20_05_54_+0200_fuIzJZuitMzcEm9A" Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Lack of Gnome Development X-Archives-Salt: d3c8ff85-6723-497b-b7f1-be2834b6fdd3 X-Archives-Hash: f264cba3a586fb3febaa0b1ea3b28aed --Signature=_Fri__9_Jul_2004_20_05_54_+0200_fuIzJZuitMzcEm9A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit begin quote On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 18:44:08 +0100 Simon Watson <simon@swat.me.uk> wrote: > I tried this after submitting my own ebuild, getting on for a month > ago, which resulted in the following unhelpful response shown at: > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54008 - and has not yet been > updated. okay, you just got a generic answer, so I figure I'd post this one too: there is a list, also known as ftp-release-list@gnome.org .. We are subscribed, if you post a bug to repeat that info to us, you are simply cluttering our buglists. My current -unread- list of bugs is way over six thousand. around a thousand of those are Gnome related. See my issue? Also, submitting your own version does very little when you don't tell what you changed. Better use the "diff -u" command to show us. if its only the change of "mv nautilus-$OLDVERSION.ebuild nautilus-$NEWVERSION.ebuild" ... don't bother. in your case, the only difference is a (broken, on top of it) change of the eel dependency from $PV to strict .1 (when .2 is the latest....) Also, unstable releases never end up in the tree, but are maintained (usually ;) in paralell by devs, who then at some time compare notes and push it into the tree as package.masked during the rc phase of Gnome development. Make my work a bit easier, dont file bugs for every of the 60+ packages released. ( And yes, I saw the announcement of Gnome 2.6.2... I was in the room at GVADEC ) Sorry if I sound harsh and bitter, but I'm wading through bugreport emails right now, and its not made much easier by annoying extras. //Spider -- begin .signature Tortured users / Laughing in pain See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. end --Signature=_Fri__9_Jul_2004_20_05_54_+0200_fuIzJZuitMzcEm9A Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFA7t6GZS9CZTi033kRAkHsAKCMtrBSloa0WEJKD3VkQOOJqhAHeACfVhhX RatM7Uf5hJnmp4fzlqeLz1A= =SwCI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Fri__9_Jul_2004_20_05_54_+0200_fuIzJZuitMzcEm9A--