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 E40AC138247 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 00:12:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AF2FEE0B41; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 00:12:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gerard.telenet-ops.be (gerard.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.48]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F39E0B20 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 00:12:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by gerard.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id pCCW1m00L2khLEN0HCCWib; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 01:12:30 +0100 Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 01:11:37 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman To: floppym@gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Please consider removing use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.mask Message-ID: <20131114011137.5d696d31@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: References: <20131113151012.04145837@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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; boundary="Sig_/FRfBWRx6B0r71rdOe3rs_56"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 9273eab4-e15c-4e8f-a8de-212cc17a1c98 X-Archives-Hash: 80eda6dd39cffdbe308aa759932200f0 --Sig_/FRfBWRx6B0r71rdOe3rs_56 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:41:40 -0500 Mike Gilbert wrote: > Let's talk about the development workflow we use for a minute: >=20 > [...] >=20 > This is not a completely social issue; there is a very real > technical/QA issue that needs to be addressed on the development side. > If you can figure that out, we can talk about changing the end-user > experience. The existence of use.stable.mask and the end-user experience however have no one-on-one mapping (or should not have it); so, currently from the user perspective it is easy to put the blame on use.stable.mask without entirely being experienced with it from a developer perspective. The blame being put there might be a consequence of something being more problematic towards the interface with the user; some form of more proper feature, notification or communication missing. I think that we should rather look at what kind of options we have to improve things there, because I really don't see a change to the existence or functionality of use.stable.mask coming out of this thread. --=20 With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D --Sig_/FRfBWRx6B0r71rdOe3rs_56 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJShBU5AAoJEJWyH81tNOV9Y3UH/jon4qQSF3uiRVqMATaSWDun j8NWKEIci7lOYQkCNgxSBNxcSujILQ1JggJtA99WcFhCbmK0K1ZaRc6m5eop8qRi 9EVzyS6VcR/RINvmTAa4xUO3PIkbZVNPoVhQjeyore/p8+aUqk6zCDjD5V/+oORv AcJ7GBkX1gZFsk3jm3gAL82TFO+fT4wEUyGYoJBKlpNaRrj8h2VUo5RlrIAjB3ct 9nw1UuHmKkOfyusuQ0h9hQ5vQlYX7PY9jqOsH8fRmyTQyATvUPGBgXz1D7d1kVcU m5brSAX496en3to/iHR8HkMy9gQjXDLdmlONXunss0FiW/aNq+/bbnXKSkh8iy4= =Up6V -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/FRfBWRx6B0r71rdOe3rs_56--