From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JBDnI-0002Hr-ND for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 18:30:53 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with SMTP id m05ITvXA000595; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 18:29:57 GMT Received: from blob.mailstation.de (smtp.mailstation.de [87.139.47.139]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with ESMTP id m05IRuMd030626 for ; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 18:27:56 GMT Received: from janus.mailstation.de (janus.mailstation.de [192.168.168.10]) by blob.mailstation.de (8.14.2/8.13.4) with ESMTP id m05IYMso018579 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 19:34:25 +0100 From: "Wulf C. Krueger" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 19:27:27 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <20080101103002.083C4652C4@smtp.gentoo.org> <1199506450.7609.23.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <477FBC0E.2090906@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <477FBC0E.2090906@gentoo.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="nextPart2813431.KKLKJYPj6g"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200801051927.32077.philantrop@gentoo.org> X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (blob.mailstation.de [192.168.168.30]); Sat, 05 Jan 2008 19:34:25 +0100 (CET) X-mailstation-de-MailScanner-Information: Scanned using: F-Prot, ClamAv, Bitdefender X-mailstation-de-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-mailstation-de-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-1.44, required 5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.44) X-mailstation-de-MailScanner-From: philantrop@gentoo.org X-mailstation-de-MailScanner-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Archives-Salt: d959fc25-52be-4ca9-bc93-e93f36b3cb80 X-Archives-Hash: 6eb7dae4afd8ee1cc4e1e002c5ac0a8a --nextPart2813431.KKLKJYPj6g Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Saturday, 05. January 2008 18:19:10 Luca Barbato wrote: > This thread so far spawned lots of reply from an external contributor > making the point of keeping stale ebuilds around and 4 developers > against the idea=20 Make that 5. > Anything other suggestions? Let the maintainer of said package decide on the keywording (and therefore= =20 how to handle slacker arches).=20 An example: An arch cares more about e. g. games (and proudly blogs about=20 it) than KDE. In such a case in the future I'm going to try to work it=20 out with the respective arch and if they don't react in a timely manner,=20 I'll simply remove the stale ebuilds (or whatever action is appropriate). And, if that has happened often enough, I will take appropriate steps to=20 make sure such stuff doesn't happen again, e. g. by making sure the=20 ebuilds I maintain are not keyworded by the respective arch again until=20 their problems have been resolved. As will be the case for KDE4. It won't=20 get any mips keyword. As for Ciaran's remarks - yes, theoretically, he is right but I don't see=20 him arch testing for mips so his remarks are pretty meaningless to me. =2D-=20 Best regards, Wulf --nextPart2813431.KKLKJYPj6g Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.8 (GNU/Linux) iEUEABECAAYFAkd/zBQACgkQnuVXRcSi+5pq7gCWObtn0de8EtFYJ1EZcUuohpjD ggCcC/ZS9EW66BweBtT184tS2wJvVMg= =sShD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2813431.KKLKJYPj6g-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list