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 D3327138247 for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 19:32:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CA41BE0AB7; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 19:32:43 +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 E6CF5E0AAC for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 19:32:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.4.5] (blfd-4d08fb80.pool.mediaWays.net [77.8.251.128]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B2CEB33DA49 for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 19:32:41 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <528919D7.8070400@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 20:32:39 +0100 From: hasufell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130922 Thunderbird/17.0.9 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: Please consider removing use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.mask References: <52864645.2070506@gentoo.org> <201311161346.30387.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <20131117181543.53124b50@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 568410e0-e3b6-4ed6-bc9a-13f1c1084e3b X-Archives-Hash: fcc8a20aee147db18387c5f21e370c23 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 11/17/2013 07:46 PM, Martin Vaeth wrote: > Michał Górny wrote: >> we may as well remove support for mixing stable and unstable >> packages. In fact, this will more likely fix a few more bugs! > It was never "officially" supported. That doesn't mean we have to break it, just because we introduced some misdesigned ideas. Design decisions should be based on what a) makes ebuild development easier and b) benefits the user. Currently there are a lot of things where gentoo devs are forced to follow design decisions that turned out different than expected... and the users pick up the pieces. I'm not saying everything of that was forseeable. But it's slipping out of control. It just took me another 30minutes to update a gentoo box which I do not log into very often. I got trapped between python blockers, multilib blockers, a confused portage with wrong autounmask messages and some other things that could not be resolved automatically at all. Users should not be forced to micro-manage all sorts of stuff for a simple update. But yeah... let's just say we don't support custom useflag settings anymore, because it's so much easier then and would fix a LOT of bugs. Nice going. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSiRnXAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzBgEH/Ag3/pZohijH0Nn2Vkr3Jq51 RIBsj11zeu0xWO+wztiZgpY6MvnVbondoTZAcx5JIuTqY9RB12oelRl6R0ZtBlSR Q5idRFzO+w2RgUp0bLpD4H4fkV8vrcOcsZlysaz5jnpmHYOMTghGgfd5EgQx4qw3 YQnFUTDzoYBcsY6jbndqWQrWRCekTsUAPPiqZkocEgBOiRu3awLtbVbz5JB5jWRL o/fGpn3d5qEvelTSYLU7R1vqhxAFY6SeYPt/ewCC/tkNlNJJ2NsvSCvfYd6mgUC5 BCnXA9fUGvKqoGhGx2rn+JjgoyBxTvUAQFHEae4aFsKTF4WehvO7Gx53YSo3HIw= =6WzP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----