From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7452 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2004 17:19:43 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 25 Aug 2004 17:19:43 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C01Qx-00051F-VC for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:19:42 +0000 Received: (qmail 16178 invoked by uid 89); 25 Aug 2004 17:19:37 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 2015 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2004 17:19:37 +0000 Message-ID: <412CCA32.7020205@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:19:46 +0100 From: Robert Moss User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (X11/20040817) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <1091094759.6176.23.camel@6-allhosts> <20040825065635.GA21244@sdf.lonestar.org> <200408251040.45561.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200408251040.45561.vapier@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming repoman check will fail on large files in the tree X-Archives-Salt: 1703edf4-ff73-40b4-ba8d-ebfe1a757994 X-Archives-Hash: 49759377eb8cddec25b4bf85ddd7ca00 Last time there was a big file QA check of the tree, someone said that certain things (such as bootloaders) were exempt. As such, despite the fact that I don't quite understand why splash.xpm.gz is in the tree rather than on the mirrors, when I last committed a new grub I left it there in files/. Will there be exemptions for certain circumstances (I'm sure there must be a reason for the above) or not? Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 25 August 2004 02:56 am, Tavis Ormandy wrote: > >>Sorry for the late reply, but does this really need to be checked by >>repoman, shouldnt this kind of decision be left to the developers >>discretion? > > > it should be but since it's obvious that policy is ignored (either because the > dev doesnt notice or they just dont care), we need something to help enforce > -mike > > -- > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list > -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list