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 550431381F3 for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:38:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9A01BE0983; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:38:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AACE5E0931 for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:38:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.4] (f055014176.adsl.alicedsl.de [78.55.14.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: chithanh) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 877A133DE43 for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:38:53 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5173F9F7.6050100@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:38:47 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2jDrS1UaGFuaCBDaHJpc3RvcGhlciBOZ3V54buFbg==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:20.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/20.0 SeaMonkey/2.17 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] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in profiles: ChangeLog package.mask References: <20130419091632.D01152171D@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <20130419153043.30ffc50c@portable> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 25db6778-7f2a-45c9-83a2-74841e6439eb X-Archives-Hash: 6174393924c935b24e1e5e3c6eec635a Denis Dupeyron schrieb: > I'm hoping this kind of immature and abrasive behaviours will not > propagate (notice the plural here). Yes, when you see a package being > actively maintained by somebody else you should absolutely not touch > it without talking to that person or team first. I fail to see any wrong behavior here. A bug report was created and a review of the changes was requested. The first reaction came after several weeks after the bug filing, and the first objection almost two months after the change was applied. https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=455074 Then the maintainer came and masked his package, which I see nothing wrong with either. Except for the violation of visibility requirements only in this particular case. > By the way folks, a better > job also involves communication and behaviour which is what we all > generally suck at. When someone asks about changing a package which someone else maintains, I always suggest reporting a bug about it. Do you think that is generally ok, or not the proper way to communicate? Best regards, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn