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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GJrgo-00077A-8B for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2006 13:07:06 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k83D5n8s026611; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 13:05:49 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k83D37wD031762 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 13:03:07 GMT Received: from iglu.bnet.local (c155244.adsl.hansenet.de [213.39.155.244]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D11E565056 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 13:03:06 +0000 (UTC) From: Carsten Lohrke To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 15:02:57 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.4 References: <44F95E3E.9000708@gentoo.org> <200609030016.47911.carlo@gentoo.org> <200609030042.08282@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> In-Reply-To: <200609030042.08282@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.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: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1542615.SzNS2Tjnn2"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200609031503.03178.carlo@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 7b2567d5-3678-4dd3-b129-c5114fe743f2 X-Archives-Hash: 9c120412d671b33bed5baa76d781ed5b --nextPart1542615.SzNS2Tjnn2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Either MTA or MUA brokeness. Another email I have to send a second time. :( On Sunday 03 September 2006 00:42, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten=F2 wrote: > And waiting other 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 months won't change the thing. Why? Becau= se > we have _no_ accessibility team right now.=20 Well, the bug is assigned to williamh, who is not /completely/ inactive. I= =20 wonder, if only 37 commits in more than two years suffices for cvs access,= =20 though. > If we had one, the problem would=20 > have been solved. Unfortunately that software is doomed to lag behind the > rest of Gentoo unless someone maintain it. If it wasn't for the need of > that software by some users, probably treecleaners would have removed that > already. > > In _this_ particular case, the notice interval is not important. You're wrong here. What I'm inclined about is that we had (leastwise) a=20 fourteen day short notice to when the releaase snapshot would be taken. To= =20 the end of this time frame there was another one that we'd release with GCC= =20 4.x. Even if we had enough people to deal with everything thrown at us,it=20 would have been impossible to fix and stabilize the relevant packages on al= l=20 architectures.=20 If I had known this as estimated goal two months earlier, I'd had switched = to=20 GCC 4.x a while before and noticed the bug, instead when it is too late. I= =20 consider this part of what is broken within Gentoo communication-wise. Carsten --nextPart1542615.SzNS2Tjnn2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBE+tKHVwbzmvGLSW8RArzVAJ0cHAKcyoPJPv9M5UCYFAhYW0+VRwCeMA/K hPizQRiSH/zcKTgJqBjKe8c= =Yodi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1542615.SzNS2Tjnn2-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list