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 1ECjRK-0007Az-Gw for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 19:49:06 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j86Jj5dc014914; Tue, 6 Sep 2005 19:45:05 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 j86Jh6TQ010980 for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2005 19:43:06 GMT Received: from 82-41-57-20.cable.ubr08.edin.blueyonder.co.uk ([82.41.57.20] helo=snowdrop.home) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1ECjOh-0008G5-Ii for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 19:46:24 +0000 Received: from localhost.home ([127.0.0.1] helo=snowdrop.home) by snowdrop.home with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1ECjQ5-0005GC-Hv for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 20:47:49 +0100 Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 20:47:47 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] tentative x86 arch team glep Message-ID: <20050906204747.60753c4e@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <431DEF83.6070701@gentoo.org> References: <20050904143711.GD23576@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <1125863332.11366.89.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <20050904210535.24ab8a39@snowdrop.home> <1125865598.11360.122.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <20050904205307.GG23576@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <1125869984.11364.143.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <20050906152209.GA9825@gentoo.org> <1126034976.10430.3.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <431DEF83.6070701@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.13 (GTK+ 2.6.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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; boundary="Signature_Tue__6_Sep_2005_20_47_47_+0100_ufJxl5JmMpZ/rCBf"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 5c4debb4-18fb-456b-9cbb-7a27042ecab8 X-Archives-Hash: 4399104bcb103d7e03d4e6d5d28d16e0 --Signature_Tue__6_Sep_2005_20_47_47_+0100_ufJxl5JmMpZ/rCBf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 12:35:31 -0700 Donnie Berkholz wrote: | Chris Gianelloni wrote: | > You'd have a really long list of maintenance architectures for me. | > Like I said, I don't use a single machine. The idea of *any* | > architecture being my "primary" one just doesn't really fit. | > There's also the simple fact that it doesn't matter *at all* what | > the maintainer runs it on, only whether or not (s)he considers it | > stable. |=20 | There have been many cases where I've considered a package stable on | one architecture but not on another. How would I indicate this? This would be one of the cases where a maintainer / stable keyword would be inappropriate. I suspect there are a lot more of these than some people think... --=20 Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature_Tue__6_Sep_2005_20_47_47_+0100_ufJxl5JmMpZ/rCBf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDHfJl96zL6DUtXhERApB6AKDNGbvVG4rqnPP51yby1TlxHXjbtgCfaChL FqqdKbti5ME+wSatvbOzXtE= =tOJ3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature_Tue__6_Sep_2005_20_47_47_+0100_ufJxl5JmMpZ/rCBf-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list