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 4.54) id 1F1d9z-0000gc-F6 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 05:25:35 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k0P5OpJC010696; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 05:24:51 GMT Received: from sccrmhc14.comcast.net (sccrmhc14.comcast.net [204.127.202.59]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k0P5MwmW029816 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 05:22:58 GMT Received: from enterprise.weeve.org (c-67-176-51-14.hsd1.co.comcast.net[67.176.51.14]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc14) with ESMTP id <2006012505225701400egbdbe>; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 05:22:57 +0000 Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:22:54 -0700 From: Jason Wever To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unmasking modular X Message-ID: <20060124222254.1a481008@enterprise.weeve.org> In-Reply-To: <43D6B9AB.2040203@gentoo.org> References: <43D5D1E4.9020801@gentoo.org> <43D6AE0C.3080702@gentoo.org> <43D6B048.6010903@egr.msu.edu> <43D6B9AB.2040203@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.0.0-rc3 (GTK+ 2.8.10; x86_64-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="Sig_a3X8Ii9hE2ry4b7zV=iN1lL"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 4c40e54d-2826-4d73-be47-8d7a3ad0cefd X-Archives-Hash: 0cf5e54522400e6490666f802b6810b1 --Sig_a3X8Ii9hE2ry4b7zV=iN1lL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:35:07 -0800 Donnie Berkholz wrote: > But if there are archs that would rather not move to modular X, that's > their prerogative. The way I look at it is, sometimes change comes at > a price. I really hope they aren't any archs I use though, because I > take a certain amount of pride in making the best and newest X > available. When people remask it, it's like they're directly battling > against the whole reason I'm involved in Gentoo. As an arch team, SPARC would like to move to modular X. However if packages are broken by this unmasking, it *will* be masked on SPARC until such a time that this is fixed. Also a complaint will be filed with developer relations and QA as this blatantly and knowingly defies the policies regarding keywording that were put in place to intentionally prohibit this kind of behavior. I'm not trying to be a party pooper here, but breaking the portage tree should never be an acceptable answer. Cheers, --=20 Jason Wever Gentoo/Sparc Team Co-Lead --Sig_a3X8Ii9hE2ry4b7zV=iN1lL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFD1wswdKvgdVioq28RAkbVAJ9/+2BuwOdvjIA3i4/8zTl7noWBLwCfSEWc mzwzr+sMw5r5gGwvtY9KSNY= =J11c -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_a3X8Ii9hE2ry4b7zV=iN1lL-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list