From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [156.56.111.197]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j1PAiuS3020395 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 10:44:57 GMT Received: from [212.110.39.244] (helo=mail.pnpitalia.it) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.42) id 1D4cxs-0004hx-Cw for gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 10:44:56 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.pnpitalia.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id C97EF1F8D90 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:44:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.pnpitalia.it ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (db [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 26113-06 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:44:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from [1.1.1.153] (cisco.pnp [1.1.1.153]) by mail.pnpitalia.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50C171F882A for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:44:55 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <421F01E6.8040209@pnpitalia.it> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:45:58 +0100 From: Francesco Riosa User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: it, it-it, en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] -* v.s. package.mask References: <421B2BDD.107@pnpitalia.it> <20050222171919.GB22112@curie-int.vc.shawcable.net> <421E2CA5.4030105@gentoo.org> <421EED54.40609@pnpitalia.it> <20050225101327.GC19670@ols-dell.iic.hokudai.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <20050225101327.GC19670@ols-dell.iic.hokudai.ac.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at db X-Archives-Salt: 6a0d5c98-d7c4-4caa-8471-d740db0d884e X-Archives-Hash: 7fd1152878f873140561a8ac58aa91ad Georgi Georgiev ha scritto: >I hope I am not really hijacking the thread, but: > >maillog: 25/02/2005-10:18:12(+0100): Francesco Riosa types > > >>Maybe after some time it has been in the tree keyworded "-*" (testing, >>testing, testing)? >> >> > >What's the policy for "-*" v.s. "package.mask"? '-*' is pretty annoying >in my opinion. Is "-*" for really, really bad ebuilds or something? > > Don't know well about gentoo policy about that, in this case, since it's something completely new I suggest the "-*" like a request to be tested from a developer on every arch before leave it at user testing. In every case we are speaking of a still non-existing stuff. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list