From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00378138010 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:59:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A2AF921C04D; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:59:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pb0-f53.google.com (mail-pb0-f53.google.com [209.85.160.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18B5921C013 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:58:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f53.google.com with SMTP id wz12so1147300pbc.40 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:58:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=ntwDuPbdyF8IJJDvGyuJa/8jftXHmo5Kh5C1pixfYLc=; b=oeGwGfjQqwI19RChK6A1kf1dbQ4P1vfee+uRMp1+DGAmyX4gjuigNEiEvjA0tcNSlk O8jutRWGIv++6XBkyN1yCGOk5BpSmVjt4S8UO2uA4pxzIncyNpORWeY70Nxto42GOBDK BxZQDstOFZ6UknZWTwVheyw3tK9WpNVZQ4djF7pLGncrh0aqq/p+AlnW9QWPGG4tUpEa /rIgtcpJvuEfAGDKJGr9+DtpyZNZhrCfwk+AElufpAg4mYKT6iAVm4SDEHCTowsq9WIv kBSlopAoDfmX1npim5K4uxEDwxnzWc45AFPW8qElqF077Bt1kHbsx6QrcP1thKvDFbfs VEdQ== Received: by 10.68.224.138 with SMTP id rc10mr115164322pbc.34.1351709901135; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:58:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from saladin.home.flameeyes.eu ([2001:470:d:ce2:226:b9ff:fed7:bf1f]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id vs3sm2677367pbc.61.2012.10.31.11.58.19 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:58:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <509174C8.3090408@flameeyes.eu> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:58:16 -0700 From: =?UTF-8?B?RGllZ28gRWxpbyBQZXR0ZW7Dsg==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121027 Thunderbird/16.0.1 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: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-libs/boost: boost-1.46.1-r1.ebuild metadata.xml boost-1.49.0-r1.ebuild boost-1.51.0-r1.ebuild ChangeLog boost-1.47.0.ebuild boost-1.35.0-r2.ebuild boost-1.47.0-r1.ebuild boost-1.39.0.ebuild boost-1.50.0-r2.ebuild boost-1.42.0-r1.ebuild boost-1.51.0.ebuild boost-1.37.0-r1.ebuild boost-1.42.0-r2.ebuild boost-1.50.0.ebuild boost-1.48.0-r2.ebuild boost-1.42.0.ebuild boost-1.35.0-r5.ebuild boost-1.41.0-r3.ebuild boost-1.45.0.ebuild References: <20121031163225.EE2E121600@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <20121031194940.50b2dadb@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <20121031194940.50b2dadb@pomiocik.lan> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlZ2qFFyNLQ1iwNTQLeWy/33tgK0iyi35fNHLS+GM4OZGdcdZK6/CbY7++5+fyXW3GtLZBd X-Archives-Salt: 6774e29f-1a2c-448d-a79f-955ab7847009 X-Archives-Hash: 299342ab2384c55fd6e84a9a3751d687 On 31/10/2012 11:49, Michał Górny wrote: > In other words, you have thrown a big, destructive change to live, > stable systems without prior testing (and don't say you were able to > test it thoroughly in one day's time) and you have left them for other > people to maintain and fix. > > I am really getting tired of those 'senior developers' who believe that > Gentoo is their private playground where they can do whatever comes > into their mind and ignore package maintainers. Given the kind of destructive behaviour that boost has been having, given that everybody else _beside you_ don't see any reason to keep that slotted boost, given that you've been acting for the most part as a sockpuppet for a developer who's been kicked out of Gentoo, I think it's obvious why I went the way I went. If this is "destructive", everything that has been done with boost up to this point is "apocalyptic". Here's the deal: I've stated clearly what the situation was going to be; Tiziano has been the primary maintainer (first in the list) and he's okay with the move, he _is_ in the cpp herd that will take care of it, and as I said I'll make sure to help out because I have a number of packages depending on boost (but not on other C++ libraries). You had a month while Mike delayed glibc-2.16 stable, among other things because of boost-1.50, and you did _squat_ to handle it. So it's time that people who've been there before step up and fix it the way that it has to be fixed. (And yes, I haven't tested it _thoroughly_ unfortunately, because of the stupid testsuite that goes nowhere and so on ... but I made sure that an update on a stable system does not change links to libraries and headers, and now I'm running tinderboxing for both ~arch, masked and stable.) -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flameeyes@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/