From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IweKF-0001GN-A9 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:48:39 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with SMTP id lAQDldRc022657; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:47:39 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with ESMTP id lAQDjeXa020114 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:45:40 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8C6F650A5; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:45:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -0.434 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.434 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.454, BAYES_05=-1.11, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m9CF57D4dqiC; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:45:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dash.upc.es (dash.upc.es [147.83.2.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B81F64D25; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:45:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from haydn.upc.es (haydn.upc.es [147.83.76.4]) by dash.upc.es (8.14.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lAQDjOA6024706; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:45:24 +0100 Received: from [147.83.76.87] (ender.upc.es [147.83.76.87]) by haydn.upc.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 500CA64810B; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:45:19 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <474ACB51.1020806@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:34:09 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Jos=E9_Luis_Rivero_=28yoswink=29=22?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070728) 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 CC: flameeyes@gentoo.org, cardoe@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New USE flags documentation References: <20071124130354.GA8295@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20071124130354.GA8295@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mail-Scanned: Criba 2.0 + Clamd X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (dash.upc.es [147.83.2.50]); Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:45:24 +0100 (CET) X-Archives-Salt: ddfb48ec-8b02-48d1-9f58-ad85a741c2e0 X-Archives-Hash: 522195348fe5f04d5e1b23c81f63dddb Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > > I'm not asking for an extra overhead of 'bureaucracy' (write specs, > mailling @dev, send to the council, etc.) but a bit more of communication > would be appreciated: Seems like everyone who contact me/us about this thread is agree about the needed of write a GLEP before doing this kind of global changes. So I would like to add a couple of considerations: 1. Dear gentoo devs, in the future, please, write a GLEP for global changes affecting all of us and post them to -dev. This way you can get some feedback, improve the original idea and inform everybody about the new feature (all-in-one). 2. With respect to the new metadata USE flag implementation, I think that reverting the changes could be quite radical so my vote goes for: leave the thingy as it (stop adding use flags to metadata for now), write a quick GLEP and go through the process. When it's done, migrate the current data (if needed) and enjoy. Thanks. -- Jose Luis Rivero Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list