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 5ACD01380DC for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 01:09:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 19FDFE0A65; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 01:09:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from albert.telenet-ops.be (albert.telenet-ops.be [195.130.137.90]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA6BFE0A40 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 01:09:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by albert.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id NR9D1n00E2khLEN06R9DFA; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 02:09:13 +0100 Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 02:07:42 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: steev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: dropping redundant stable keywords Message-ID: <20140205020742.048cef9f@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <1391559808.3520.2.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> References: <52E7DBC1.5020102@gentoo.org> <20140128182304.7d458a17@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> <20140203062524.GA7467@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20140203104341.2add2760@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140204210319.GA1935@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20140205010833.1bcf8dca@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <1391559808.3520.2.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> 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: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 78a05f61-c65b-43c0-869c-8d80663b8560 X-Archives-Hash: 129549cedeac9542d9293e0e6d4ae54c On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 18:23:28 -0600 Steev Klimaszewski wrote: > On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 01:08 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote: > > > "The -* keyword is special. It is used to indicate package versions > > which are not worth trying to test on unlisted archs." [1] > > > > You can keep rehashing about "winning", but all it does is break > > policy. > > > > [1]: http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording > > > > We are saying it is not for use on any but the listed arch, so don't > try to. No? Or are we going to hinge this all on the definition of > "test" in that statement? It has already been tested; and thus, it would be a policy breach to use -* over dropping a keyword. It is also worth trying, when man power allows; or are we going to hinge on the definition of "worth" as well? Looks like we are playing word games; I'll pick one, "unlisted" archs. The appropriate way to say that "it is not for use" on a particular arch is to mask the package, a less appropriate way which is still valid but less appreciated is to remove the keyword; but using the wording "not for use" as "not worth trying to test" is bending policy. -- 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