From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EKSsx-00050e-G4 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 03:45:35 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j8S3bmee000770; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 03:37:48 GMT Received: from mail.genone.homeip.net (dsl-082-083-019-250.arcor-ip.net [82.83.19.250]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j8S3a8TG018358 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 03:36:08 GMT Received: by mail.genone.homeip.net (Postfix, from userid 460) id 2612B2817D; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 05:45:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (unknown [192.168.0.2]) by mail.genone.homeip.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7EA528128 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 05:45:10 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <433A0592.4080306@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 05:53:06 +0300 From: Marius Mauch User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: 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@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] first council meeting References: <1126897217.7832.49.camel@Memoria.anyarch.net> <20050918124024.GB7222@pluto.atHome> <433772B5.9050909@leetworks.com> <200509260015.10267.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200509260015.10267.vapier@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4-gr0-genone_0.7 (2005-06-05) on lyta.genone.homeip.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=7.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,MISSING_SUBJECT autolearn=failed version=3.0.4-gr0-genone_0.7 X-Archives-Salt: 0d2f2199-540b-4f79-9c20-d27b057771fd X-Archives-Hash: b7395d08f29bb900d6bb6b4cb33f44d2 Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Monday 26 September 2005 12:01 am, Andrew Muraco wrote: > >>1) would ?arch become the old ~arch, if it was implemented? >>2) would people actually try to run a full ?arch system? >>3) #2, would it be possible without breakage? > > > if we went with a testing mask it'd mean that users would be forced to select > individual testing packages ... they wouldnt be able to globally accept all > testing packages Not completely true (assuming testing.mask would work like package.mask), but I'd rather not say how it's possible. Marius -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list