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 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HgTan-00050p-5t for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:34:37 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l3OMXlSf003546; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:33:47 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l3OMV0Ak032319 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:31:02 GMT Received: from phi.witten.lan (p83.129.4.43.tisdip.tiscali.de [83.129.4.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A73BD65185; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:30:59 +0000 (UTC) From: Danny van Dyk Organization: Gentoo To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [ANN] Multiple version suffixes illegal in gentoo-x86 Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 00:30:53 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: Seemant Kulleen References: <200704242111.44663.kugelfang@gentoo.org> <200704250001.56920.kugelfang@gentoo.org> <1177453288.18325.9.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1177453288.18325.9.camel@localhost> X-Face: =?utf-8?q?57Z3foFdBj=3BKdmU=5EFM=2Eec=5C4=7BQf/F6=25ePh=5C=5DM=5EaXPX*=5D?= =?utf-8?q?J5S=7CM=7E+vR=3F=24iW=5Cn44=5E2sguPTOtw=0A=09fe+7gKTm*!OXGQPYqML?= =?utf-8?q?=7CL1ezSI3-=27E=25zxZigvAK?=>3$?~'4IPBoi\H2)pV6U(26V@ =?utf-8?q?jq=7CAIp=0A=09yY?=>'!D}EOi=Q+-|CIh-d4riWfZZ">G.Rj!}78kX$8Zt0:epNWTo[{_/zJb< =?utf-8?q?Ud=2Eon=7EprEW*=0A=09tIvqI=7B+e=3AgMC?= 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="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200704250030.53826.kugelfang@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 209a3cf1-2d84-4a4f-aebb-904020945de1 X-Archives-Hash: e4782efe6bef5734a3a07e1b7f059af8 Am Mittwoch, 25. April 2007 schrieb Seemant Kulleen: > Hi Danny, > > > Look at it from my POV. I only knew about the alsa version at > > first. I knew it was removed already. Then i learned about mplayer. > > Ok... i can live with that as long as nothing else in there. Then I > > learned about transcode and I asked my fellow Council members to > > cut it. > I'm not sure I see that as a council issue, to be honest, but that's > ok. In my eyes it was a policy issue. Tree-wide policies have to pass the council in one form or the other. So why shouldn't Council care here? > > Besides, the affected maintainers have since then silently and > > gladly agreed to remove said versions and agree that we should > > stick to known methods until proper combinations of version > > suffixes have been agreed on. > You see, that would have been my first approach, instead of a rushed > council weighing in. I just wonder why several people feel attacked by this decission while the affected parties have no problem with it. > > > Seemant: I'd like to continue to discuss the ways of council > > decission on gentoo-council rather than on gentoo-dev ML. :-) > > Happy to do that, in the general case. In this specific case, > however, it's valid here, because the entire thread revolves around a > rather rash council decision (who knew such a thing was even > possible?) that affects pretty much all Gentoo developers (and > prospective developers). Anybody who attends the regular Council meetings and/or reads their logs/summaries knew that this kind of decission is possible. Danny -- Danny van Dyk Gentoo/AMD64 Project, Gentoo Scientific Project -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list