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 1OSy9j-0004NL-4k for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:08:44 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3B4D9E0E94; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:08:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f53.google.com (mail-bw0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C0BAE0DFF for ; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:08:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz6 with SMTP id 6so313885bwz.40 for ; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:08:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:date:from:to:subject :message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=OweGFSWRZGUchaSKinjBrFOUoy2XC1cMLJKuvCFQVYI=; b=L9An1sv7WF8XagywViIYAEQ4gIMuQSU2DAd5cxKoYr+B0Y9kq0MmmDywk6cQyJAMey Pyjx/AYxbmhfLV8w9jC8TnO9KmGvdAlrB6UdD1DOND74b+ADtb8IJwPLqwwzhw/xV5hb xKT15JRLZjiZaosu958DYr74ZUcG3WIwrQya0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=ku5sVI6OnmM9GwnbHouB8eORGub9+FLtt2DysJ3fymsC/DwwPCwaTgjfsO+o0qQITA sYdIbTb49rS8N0ZfbXzAHoxumNffCWg+H6CuEBz/ETnSeLhvZHwha4ovrxuUEbxMkQfF SrwzRGhrzKEY29nnOiACRXeDfAZbLGiz7l1G4= Received: by 10.204.162.130 with SMTP id v2mr2752487bkx.5.1277669311963; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:08:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Mystical (79.103.24.94.dsl.dyn.forthnet.gr [79.103.24.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u4sm15079237bkz.13.2010.06.27.13.08.30 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:08:31 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Markos Chandras Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:10:09 +0300 From: Markos Chandras To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations Message-ID: <20100627201009.GD1414@Mystical> References: <20100627150445.GA19456@Eternity> <1277663859.12853.4.camel@localhost> <20100627195542.GA2125@Mystical> <20100627210155.412f8efb@snowcone> 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: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="veXX9dWIonWZEC6h" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100627210155.412f8efb@snowcone> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: e94b1c34-c1d3-4109-aff2-758a997d6cb2 X-Archives-Hash: f8634af6b519888558b87e77a14bed58 --veXX9dWIonWZEC6h Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 09:01:55PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 22:55:42 +0300 > Markos Chandras wrote: > > Oh come on. I never said to stop supporting those arches. I just said > > to shrink their stable tree. What do you suggest? Pretend to have > > active exotic arches just to look shiny and pretty? >=20 > Claiming to support an exotic arch but forcing people to run ~arch on > it is not supporting it at all. One of the problems with exotic archs > is that they are much more likely to show up bugs than things that are > commonly used, and so knowing that something has been properly tested > is a lot more important there. >=20 > --=20 > Ciaran McCreesh Ok then according to your definition that supported arches =3D=3D stable tree, I can safely assume that we cannot support those arches --=20 Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org --veXX9dWIonWZEC6h Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkwnsCEACgkQ9/cejkQaxBAGGgCggHf1HwCpZuCj7ddNlJFMFVtG le0AnjkS3/Mj+0CDIsC7220PwglQScwj =6QNN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --veXX9dWIonWZEC6h--