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 1ADCE58973 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2016 21:36:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 45A4A21C01C; Wed, 3 Feb 2016 21:36:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mo4-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de (mo4-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de [81.169.146.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42AE121C001 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2016 21:36:04 +0000 (UTC) X-RZG-AUTH: :IW0NeWCpcPchHrcnS4ebzBgQnKHTmUiSF2JlOcyy9p4roSnp5yQo4oJ5cg== X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo05 Received: from pinacolada.localnet (88-133-183-17.hsi.glasfaser-ostbayern.de [88.133.183.17]) by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 37.17 AUTH) with ESMTPSA id 20522cs13La2dfb (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (curve secp521r1 with 521 ECDH bits, eq. 15360 bits RSA)) (Client did not present a certificate) for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2016 22:36:02 +0100 (CET) From: "Andreas K. Huettel" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [Fwd: [gentoo-automated-testing] BROKEN: repository became broken!] Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 22:35:56 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.2.4-gentoo; KDE/4.14.16; x86_64; ; ) References: <20160201185501.GB28175@ultrachro.me> <201602012216.54035.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <20160202013330.GT7732@vapier.lan> In-Reply-To: <20160202013330.GT7732@vapier.lan> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <201602032236.01473.dilfridge@gentoo.org> 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 X-Archives-Salt: 9cf685f6-a343-4962-bdc4-f295823b61b4 X-Archives-Hash: 3d14d709881603da5d40916c113d1995 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Am Dienstag, 2. Februar 2016, 02:33:30 schrieb Mike Frysinger: > > > I took the liberty of doing (2) and reverted the commit. Not sure why > > this needs so much discussion; after all a broken tree is always > > suboptimal. > > unless things are on fire (which i don't think this was), i don't > generally clamor for 0-day fixes. if we can find a better fix in > a day or so, then i'm happy for that. i dislike repos with history > that is just a constant stream of land, revert, land, revert, land. > > not that i'm saying your revert was wrong ... just airing my > general personal preferences. You're right of course... but there's one thing we have to keep in mind. We're not running a project were releases are made from the vcs. The vcs *is* the release... and whatever is out there gets pushed to users. This is why my personal preference is more to revert if I'm not sure that the fix will happen soon. - -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfridge@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.1 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWsnK8XxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRDMjhGQ0IwRjdCRUQxMzdBQUNCMDJEODlB NDRDRjM3M0U3RUU5OUU0AAoJEKRM83Pn7pnkBGkQALzb+HSsWSfKVmtMKD5mioIl tIQHjyR9WOARTBCv7QRfBTfUPtMXo+1aY8xX72eOtZ3UTDXy6ieaCjKJn25tDP1z u9rw4r3ClPsE+vBcQjg6fAJLeBIawJkEhGQxWFQQMxwnG1Trg7UjicJJuy+AmfKZ WIqUFtNVuNPXTcHlQax8c5gWN1hM7Q4GgPiqzhQZ8/YDVnnxAvC4VZZTQUCffr8T Q+rE/DYOFkusUkWrsUXcokgFwwggJitbsKhImKivdB2H/+nQrstXGoFsyl4kU6gD i3UCeFiNx+zchYF+XtnKOfxtYS5gNjMZsdKEJUktVV+dV7Xg5Fqpbh8HzEf2hzlj rY4fqLuBvR5ypJqwG1DeRDhMifaM4Xa/dAe93O1DFtXtO64onIwGZI+FKFdEyRT9 GcBjzWv+/iLRBQ+vafh6AO9dzJ5gpDW7BxOJp3v4CSqqDlAPv5GG7lwDGXlN9Y7j XD42ks8UUFpu3eMikFcrlR6vqT3aGclu/H2jaA9WvfAE7BdpY/MjkEJkgCedxf3Q W7aY95NvmyN0MHJLfRQG/ZwZr7aDUCPj5H/ECyZlhIcvbS7FqV65LRI62pyy0Rfj /sIaiSEmdyzdAtw5CPF+0D74AG3mFE7/92ptAQFwCVicIEObHPy084fXDmYKhgK+ cZz+90PBBcYBDRslcQ8a =O//d -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----