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 2ACE2138247 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:12:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E2570E0AB0; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:12:11 +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 02871E0AA2 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:12:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (unknown [2.126.0.130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hwoarang) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 63DF233F68A for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:12:08 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52BEEA2D.2020103@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:11:41 +0000 From: Markos Chandras User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 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 media-sound/umurmur: metadata.xml ChangeLog References: <20131225095020.A91BE2004C@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <52BACEE8.1010006@gentoo.org> <52BADA97.8010600@gentoo.org> <52BC2E30.9080006@gentoo.org> <20131226132724.6b9477af@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <20131226132724.6b9477af@googlemail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: fb072625-a6c1-477c-8260-cae1df95d04c X-Archives-Hash: e4172d7c26d3b80148c2ed9114348dcd -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 12/26/2013 01:27 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 14:25:04 +0100 hasufell > wrote: >> That is funny that you mention "cleaning up". I remember last >> time when you broke 8 ebuilds at once because you just trusted >> your outdated repoman warning to be correct. You didn't even file >> a BUG for me, you did not contact me and after I told you that it >> was wrong and that you should revert it, you didn't. >> >> That's what I call "ignoring the rest". You do not communicate, >> you do not file bugs, you just go and do stuff. > > That kind of behaviour is what the QA team is supposed to be able > to address. You should raise this issue with them rather than > accusing each other on the lists. > I completely agree with this. I feel that this thread is a sign that there is a problem on how the new QA communicates problems with the developers that cause them. I read the entire thread and I still don't think there is an agreement on who broke the tree and why. Would a private discussion be better before going publicly with accusations? - -- Regards, Markos Chandras -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJSvuotXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQzNTVDNDczOUYzRjJEMTRGNDRGMzU2RkMw OUJGNEY1NEMyQkE3RjNDAAoJEAm/T1TCun88qckQAL1Xur8yfYQ76jV2vqp47KYv mxE9sEOdew7yOBXkesrw3mU5q3/kVJg9QS4CqR/epWp6t/6LrOZkGPEB2vzE46Eo cIoC+K0U/3eQQVCHsazVM2mMMLt7d0om8l35msN6rQD33lbLe+gT05aYG+u0lpW4 k/PPnXpf9EnNiXUx/zolBYM5d0KLppeXNPhqigWQCnfxu6pOyR8STVH96zUMR5f3 buQvnBTYGwaG9h2JBeIN5ZCz6B+0jLPJH91yBxCVo66ejm01DCkVuJLLO2UPYeQY P0nE31XtpUMQrgxrpoQPQ7JJIDjELCUjHEKRd8YwRpzh1ltDEMM64tBkg+Edz6/w zMT7+tG0e1qbnafA7lXCXOb2F8DpUMgvveCvfHN2zcTlg2GWvKDWvvaDzkLOyaSH EcDen1yq9t+EyBksdLyhbM2+YF4oFq0ne8ofh2cqS1HjYFh7JLForS1EdSQReC/S 0H6yrHNd4FjqLqzFJ812iLzHOyQJ2AAQRGDqPF9kwV7riXYy5VcMlMffHW1OZv8L gMr25OZtnJv9iOIW6VzCYpv6QoDzpPInqMRE33r4sNJR2/urb6w3G66Yvyt+zSax qwkL5eLUOB1awO/XxoihTN3NQNCqFZix7CTfKd3n7OvxEXFJHCtwVEYTUb9updWc O44aMMoxNz2Vl2LTCOYo =VsAA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----