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 1GeyoO-0002q2-Nw for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:58:13 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k9VIvIF1031078; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:57:18 GMT Received: from ppsw-2.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-2.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.132]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9VIqD68022828 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:52:13 GMT X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Received: from spb42.christs.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.233.172]:50611 helo=blashyrk) by ppsw-2.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.152]:465) with esmtpsa (LOGIN:spb42) (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) id 1GeyiX-00014b-8t (Exim 4.63) for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org (return-path ); Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:52:10 +0000 Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:52:16 +0000 From: Stephen Bennett To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Only you can prevent broken portage trees Message-ID: <20061031185216.499f1a73@blashyrk> In-Reply-To: <4547922A.7030609@gentoo.org> References: <45468ED1.8050107@gentoo.org> <20061031003334.50376630@snowdrop.home> <200610310857.02169.linux@quanteam.info> <20061031150236.7b080211@snowdrop.home> <454773F6.9020605@gentoo.org> <20061031163244.2ffd9201@blashyrk> <45478062.7080109@gentoo.org> <20061031170521.6b650cc9@blashyrk> <45478562.3000706@gentoo.org> <20061031173853.247a820b@blashyrk> <45478D02.3060504@gentoo.org> <20061031180004.67381de6@snowdrop.home> <4547922A.7030609@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.5.6 (GTK+ 2.10.6; 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: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "S.P. Bennett" X-Archives-Salt: 772034a0-bf01-4b46-850a-a8d839ed661f X-Archives-Hash: be0a71e02f11915ef3e261a9b0bd6d8c On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:12:58 +0100 Jakub Moc wrote: > Oh well, this apparently doesn't go anywhere, slacking is just > wonderful, maintainers should just STFU and obey the almighty slacking > arches, security is the least of a concern and no priority, not > answering a on bug for half a year makes lots of sense and all is fine > and dandy. More cruft in the tree for t3h win. When you can find a group that can maintain keywords for the entire tree with fewer than ten people and a similar number of machines averaging 500-600MHz each (to take alpha as an example), or approximately three active devs with machines averaging below 300MHz (mips), then you can accuse the arch teams of slacking. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list