From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KljQq-0007hA-MN for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 03 Oct 2008 12:06:52 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 719ECE03B0; Fri, 3 Oct 2008 12:06:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tommyserver.de (tommyserver.de [85.14.217.158]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41E02E03B0 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2008 12:06:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.22] (Q4305.q.pppool.de [89.53.67.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tommyserver.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 92F90667261 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2008 14:06:48 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <48E60AD1.3010400@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2008 14:06:41 +0200 From: Thomas Sachau Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Testing is not a valid reason to package.mask References: <20081002222435.35768855@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> <20081003041454.733712e5@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> <200810030423.34130.cla@gentoo.org> <20081003051623.78b0ea4d@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 OpenPGP: id=211CA2D4 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigE8274502350E91A75CFB91B1" X-Archives-Salt: 1697c231-c739-4808-abb8-e24d4ef1d47a X-Archives-Hash: 21476d4b173a2b0277879df037998f35 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigE8274502350E91A75CFB91B1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Alec Warner schrieb: > On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote: >> On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 04:23:33 +0200 >> Dawid W=C4=99gli=C5=84ski wrote: >> >>> I don't think it's ok. ~arch isn't training ground. It's supposed to >>> work, so asking arch teams to keywords packages that are not supposed= >>> to work isn't good. >> We have a "testing" branch and a "stable" branch, defined by the >> KEYWORDS variable in the ebuilds. Package.masking stuff saying you're >> "testing" is at the least uninformative and highly confusing and >> unfriendly to would-be testers when in the very same context this >> already means something different (namely, it's been too short a >> while, wait one or two months for this version to go stable, as the >> ~arch keywords would suggest). >=20 > ~arch has always been for testing ebuilds; not packages. You should > not be using ~arch to test stuff you know doesn't work; that is what > package.mask is for; to prevent users from accidentally installing > broken shit. >=20 Why do you need package.mask here? If you know, it does not work on that = arch, dont keyword it. If you know it does not work anywhere, why would you even think about adding= that package? --=20 Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer --------------enigE8274502350E91A75CFB91B1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEKAAYFAkjmCtkACgkQG7kqcTWJkGeOmwP9G7djGLTWz6qEjRy9TyNYIvek BKZLqzzmPTQZ5rxBusAUV1ISgNSs/SynT4/R3YMGG6+XvwuIBD3/5fYUQmtFbNH/ Nh6wT7F9MZMCZYE2TON/i9LYF3lIXisS/6O8jvjZ9Dc+PhZBXAOiiplhtDodO34t hxjRqZywVb5Y9sC2Bjc= =Chbz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigE8274502350E91A75CFB91B1--