Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask vs ~arch

[Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1089 bytes --]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 10:12:14 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Masked commit:
> * a part of a bigger version bump, i.e. one of many packages that
> need to update together
> * or something where I *know* that issues preventing normal function
> still exist. I.e., I want to be able to ask others for testing, but
> something is still missing and I'm actively working on it.

This is how I like it to be; for ebuilds that are known as broken,
even when that is due to them being incomplete (multiple packages).

When testing packages are added as masked, they miss out on more
testing; now consider that they might just work, you can miss out on
smaller edge case^ bugs if a faster stabilization* must follow later.

 ^ The more users, the more different system environments, ...

 * Reverse dependency that needs it, security and so on.

-- 
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

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]