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 1F3q5r-0005PT-SC
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 07:38:28 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k0V7biCa025904;
	Tue, 31 Jan 2006 07:37:44 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 k0V7Zwh6015368
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 07:35:58 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 1F3q3R-00068k-Ms
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 07:35:57 +0000
Message-ID: <43DF135B.20302@gentoo.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:35:55 -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]  Re: Unmasking modular X
References: <43D5D1E4.9020801@gentoo.org> <200601252118.28410.jstubbs@gentoo.org> <43D87585.2000206@gentoo.org> <200601261626.15067.jstubbs@gentoo.org> <43D87EFB.5080505@gentoo.org> <20060131024137.GA19351@aerie.halcy0n.com> <loom.20060131T054407-23@post.gmane.org> <43DEFD31.6010500@gentoo.org> <43DF07EB.3060607@gentoo.org>
In-Reply-To: <43DF07EB.3060607@gentoo.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="------------enig0E75A398FEF02EE2BAA1A767"
X-Archives-Salt: 0843d683-8fd6-4247-975f-eb9d23c9093e
X-Archives-Hash: c5c7e0b5e73684f0afb45afca452842a

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig0E75A398FEF02EE2BAA1A767
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Joshua Jackson wrote:
> In the oldest version of the package (as all these were), I don't see
> much point in the change. They will be removed within a fairly short
> amount of time.=20

Fairly short meaning what, 6 months? A lot of old ebuilds tend to stick
around forever.

> Secondary, you are suggesting that any dev who comes
> across a modular x problem to fix it..even if this is a direct
> violation of the guidelines set forth in the documentation?

Which guidelines, exactly? I'm having trouble finding these vague
guidelines to which you refer.

I found one that said "If you make an internal, stylistic change to the
ebuild that does not change any of the installed files, then there is no
need to bump the revision number."

I also found "When a package version has proved stable for sufficient
time and the Gentoo maintainer of the package is confident that the
upgrade will not break a regular Gentoo user's machine, then it can be
moved from ~ARCH to ARCH," which, to my reading, can also apply to
transferring ~arch modular X deps to stable.

Thanks,
Donnie


--------------enig0E75A398FEF02EE2BAA1A767
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)

iD8DBQFD3xNcXVaO67S1rtsRAr8wAJ9HGeoEdZXrq2grrsb+j5Bjy9YHLgCg0cF1
rbidjGKXlLWmDtMRZLIHl7M=
=RrCO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig0E75A398FEF02EE2BAA1A767--
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list