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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-34595-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>) id 1LcMV5-0002ns-CC for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:20:47 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6EC79E0788; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:20:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AA94E0788 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:20:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.9] (unknown [151.57.3.153]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5267264EAD for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:20:42 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <49A56FDB.1080105@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:20:43 +0100 From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081205) Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> 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] Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009) References: <49A206A7.3050604@gentoo.org> <49A39CE7.4010201@gentoo.org> <20090224141912.0a666a17@snowcone> <49A41A8C.1060002@gentoo.org> <20090224161449.07bc580a@snowcone> <49A42B86.9010903@gentoo.org> <20090224182416.3db4f60f@snowcone> <49A4B54E.4060202@gentoo.org> <20090225153347.3e9aaafa@snowcone> <49A56A14.2080400@gentoo.org> <20090225160212.GA3509@dodo.hsd1.nj.comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <20090225160212.GA3509@dodo.hsd1.nj.comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 5fc319cc-4bf3-4eca-9b78-e3c5b651b9fe X-Archives-Hash: e5db58296333e66018813243f3c79b87 Thomas Anderson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 04:56:04PM +0100, Luca Barbato wrote: >>> Yes, it will warn noisily. This is unacceptable, since stable users >>> will have months and months of noise when new rules come along. >> "unacceptable"... >> >> as in "it's ugly to see"... >> > > No, it's unacceptable because stable users do not need that kind of > stuff thrown at them. Stable users use stable because they want a very > predictable workflow. Noisy errors that shouldn't affect them(they are > in the stable branch) *is* unacceptable, and not just because it's ugly, > though that's certainly part of it. You have quite a good point here. It's purely cosmetical, but since it's an unexpected behavior and it's annoying and could alienate our users it's better to avoid it with all our strength. lu -- Luca Barbato Gentoo Council Member Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero