From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NwITa-0003aX-5y for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:10:11 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 39DBAE0A00; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:10:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-fx0-f224.google.com (mail-fx0-f224.google.com [209.85.220.224]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45DE8E0AAD for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:09:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm24 with SMTP id 24so71599fxm.26 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:09:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:disposition-notification-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=1DRyDcnEuWhbeYpGYvrzfBC9lIcLdaxRmHMQv5/RfZI=; b=almmPX430p/Tk0fkYHaA7LwMpSXh4VVQjBUbZtfwYXIUHMN/1iS/ZT5Rnh+pBqeoyQ niEB7IkYlM+wLQAh6rwbnO6S4nybupkkuf/YzzCYWhxJTs0iwLG12N8HtKYiUzGzAPk0 5wKW04unKDVC8Mlj/84IxgncwomaaxrXzA7EE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to :disposition-notification-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=oyINFBWhYoy3Eao9dndf/l477J88mpgkr4/ACU3oCZWhxFug1+NJBBgSNUfblfwMhZ tQQJbWGbtsMYRaMOOfF7jd+QGGWSSgoFyu+dw2sjFEv7MZt4j9xGzyDdOzGVJ7IdPQFW irurCQj8dFZnHPRP6uc0mqtZyysxE+d3reoYU= Received: by 10.223.1.19 with SMTP id 19mr285813fad.61.1269882591142; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:09:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lebrodyl.localnet (aafi207.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.4.138.207]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 13sm3142497fxm.10.2010.03.29.10.09.50 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:09:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Maciej Mrozowski To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Reworking package stabilization policies Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 19:10:06 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.2 (Linux/2.6.31-gentoo-r10; KDE/4.4.2; x86_64; ; ) References: <20100327205841.GA12996@linux1> <201003280747.28790.reavertm@gmail.com> <1269847838.24530.80.camel@tablet> In-Reply-To: <1269847838.24530.80.camel@tablet> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Message-Id: <201003291910.06692.reavertm@gmail.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: c03da690-183c-420a-9e9e-41fb40e1f71d X-Archives-Hash: b7d8e8101d76b8c407ba0916568ca9e9 On Monday 29 of March 2010 09:30:38 Peter Volkov wrote: > =D0=92 =D0=92=D1=81=D0=BA, 28/03/2010 =D0=B2 07:47 +0200, Maciej Mrozow= ski =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: > > No, seriously - given the fact that some of my packages were even > > stabilized without contacting me (app-misc/hal-cups-utils, > > app-admin/system-config- printer-common) >=20 > If you know packages are broken why they were not hardmasked? If they > have no problems what why it was bad idea to mark them stable? They are not broken, they're just not suitable. It's like stabilizing gcc= -2.95=20 now, even when it won't work with some recent KDE/boost. hal-cups-utils is not a problem system-config-printer-common-1.1.13 is as it's being used by maybe=20 incompatible now system-config-printer-kde from testing arch (I've raised= =20 those deps now), besides I wanted to wait for polkit-1 with this package=20 (otherwise dbus "newprinternotifications" can be received only by root or= =20 require tweaking dbus conf to work out of the box . That's why kde- base/system-config-printer-kde and kde-base/printer-applet were intention= ally=20 left out from KDE-4.3.3 stabilization list. --=20 regards MM