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 4.54)
	id 1F1Xlt-000310-6R
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:40:21 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k0ONcL19002822;
	Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:38:21 GMT
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k0ONZAGm006419
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:35:10 GMT
Received: from c-67-171-150-177.hsd1.or.comcast.net ([67.171.150.177] helo=[192.168.1.106])
	by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.54)
	id 1F1Xgs-0007hc-1e
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:35:10 +0000
Message-ID: <43D6B9AB.2040203@gentoo.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:35:07 -0800
From: Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@gentoo.org>
User-Agent: Mail/News 1.5 (X11/20060120)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
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] Unmasking modular X
References: <43D5D1E4.9020801@gentoo.org> <43D6AE0C.3080702@gentoo.org> <43D6B048.6010903@egr.msu.edu>
In-Reply-To: <43D6B048.6010903@egr.msu.edu>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="------------enig222633D8E50DAD5D904290DA"
X-Archives-Salt: acb44fcb-c1dc-4619-8610-74db45287331
X-Archives-Hash: c2315e415a57fc2919658f0df2a243b1

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig222633D8E50DAD5D904290DA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Alec Warner wrote:
> Well IMHO, you can do what you want and if any arch team doesn't like i=
t
> they can always pmask it themselves in their arch profile.  I will say =
I
> disagree with putting it into ~arch in the current state, although I
> agree with the rationale, and it IS your package(s), just as it's
> essentially their arch.
>=20
> I guess the deal here is to not encourage this type of behavior;
> intentially breaking ~arch all the time and then making the arch teams
> "clean up" so to speak.  I don't believe this to be the case here, I
> just don't want to see it become commonplace ;)

I'm certainly not trying to put any extra work on the arch teams; this
is conceptually arch-independent, and the only extra work should be on
the x11 team and on maintainers of unported apps.

But if there are archs that would rather not move to modular X, that's
their prerogative. The way I look at it is, sometimes change comes at a
price. I really hope they aren't any archs I use though, because I take
a certain amount of pride in making the best and newest X available.
When people remask it, it's like they're directly battling against the
whole reason I'm involved in Gentoo.

Thanks,
Donnei


--------------enig222633D8E50DAD5D904290DA
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFD1rmtXVaO67S1rtsRAhLcAJ9c93KMoh8jyIDKHpxY0l/XGYS6zwCgl1bG
TlpqxpE1pWhEkGGVQbnNu9Q=
=JxTw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig222633D8E50DAD5D904290DA--
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list