From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E042138247 for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2013 22:56:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AE442E0AB4; Fri, 8 Nov 2013 22:56:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ob0-f182.google.com (mail-ob0-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C45C6E0AB0 for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2013 22:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f182.google.com with SMTP id wp18so2117337obc.41 for ; Fri, 08 Nov 2013 14:56:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=3z2DjDHKMsO7p+aL/zpRkd+GwwhotlzSen0/+k6qY+M=; b=lwSWLY6auxrzMdOZrxEDAz0T1Wix/mGusbmMmTadqDGUqGacT3U0+bjYgq9YR6diu9 b5cm4FUbZOjQZhThZssHtNWtTYAgw4NtYFW/mc429KwjfdXv3gpHsd3ClkdlGuQiEvsL wtnMoPXLvb3UnnILutVcyfRxT2mbnGCjVxOAMuZ3QTPr+Rp4QK7vp573NawpZEukAMsC NbY2wOyp5Iw/PY/99rtT5QK3LljgMdnDwp32UCrFSFxUzQuDi+pjdZpc2fiWzRFhyidO Ru26SOZo7v863DD6tJ6A/6rV1K6DF9p5TBjLRqGVhkfj0PtyksK8QIfc5ZWbB3nNeHGS Bijw== X-Received: by 10.60.56.3 with SMTP id w3mr6739198oep.37.1383951365508; Fri, 08 Nov 2013 14:56:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-91-128.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.91.128]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ru3sm10829327obc.2.2013.11.08.14.56.02 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 08 Nov 2013 14:56:04 -0800 (PST) Sender: William Hubbs Received: by linux1 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 08 Nov 2013 16:56:01 -0600 Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2013 16:56:01 -0600 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy-level discussion for minimum versions on dependencies Message-ID: <20131108225601.GA25213@linux1> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <527A5D22.10009@gentoo.org> <527A6B1C.8070501@gmail.com> 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="fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 6743cda3-b5a5-40c1-a246-292441cedfb7 X-Archives-Hash: 1298904a25ce972b95e1c1cfae99e2e7 --fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 01:28:13PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Alan McKinnon = wrote: > > I agree with this sentiment. It's always been my view that the needs of > > a package are driven by the package itself, not by the tree. > > > > Rationale: A package will build and run as long as it's own requirements > > are met regardless of what the tree states. > > >=20 > ++, and to all that follows. >=20 > I wouldn't go hunting down and bugging devs for every atom that > doesn't specify a minimum version - this stuff isn't always easy to > find. However, if somebody offers a minimum version I'd consider it a > valid bug. As a maintainer, I start by checking the documentation for the software I was packaging and making the dependencies match the version requirements there. William --fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlJ9bAEACgkQblQW9DDEZTiPWwCdEqUX6lCmULHpolviIDO6TkWd bx4AnR0ap8lfrBroqfi1RrvFe8Q9GvR9 =Eut9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7--