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 5E26A138247 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 11:06:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B36A3E0C52; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 11:06:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2B6FE09BE for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 11:06:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.22] (pD9E9ED21.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.233.237.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tommy) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69C6533F920 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 11:06:13 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52DBB1A1.40300@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 12:06:09 +0100 From: Thomas Sachau User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:26.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/26.0 SeaMonkey/2.23 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] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy References: <20140114213719.GA2684@laptop.home> <52D6D489.9030302@gentoo.org> <20140115190744.GA2645@laptop.home> In-Reply-To: <20140115190744.GA2645@laptop.home> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 OpenPGP: id=211CA2D4 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="UW4dFRSiU1LL8TmUT1HLH4D9Dw45EhHmC" X-Archives-Salt: d7e48199-341a-4b3f-81c2-2f55d2f46c19 X-Archives-Hash: ec10cc00574e078695b6e04f979e426b This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --UW4dFRSiU1LL8TmUT1HLH4D9Dw45EhHmC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable William Hubbs schrieb: > When you say "drop keywords" do you mean: >=20 > 1) revert the old version back to ~arch or > 2) remove the old version. >=20 > As a maintainer, I would rather do 2, because I do not want to backport= > fixes to the old version. >=20 > William >=20 With 1) users would still be using newer versions with ~arch keyword except with explicit mask on newer versions, so keeping the old versions doesnt make much sense. With 2), there may be additional one-time cost for the maintainer (since he should check with reserve dependencies first to avoid broken dependency trees), but afterwards this solution should mean an adjusted amount of stable packages for each arch and no permanent additional work for the maintainer. --=20 Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer --UW4dFRSiU1LL8TmUT1HLH4D9Dw45EhHmC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SeaMonkey - http://www.enigmail.net/ iJwEAQECAAYFAlLbsaEACgkQG7kqcTWJkGdOgAP+Jl7P9rRDA3mSuQNb2B9JrPWn 5KCp040ce3EZq55NfSdLkfAx5meWRHdIu8KFS6UKk7rtwaTq5dVZUCN82UChV596 U7TnuCA2tt3dvfb1Ec0/KS6dLgmuRNz0KWOFVPFCSmqd5b9NCwxQel3fI5VZS+yT XmrpJrzomCm5Jr4IbbM= =EiKM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --UW4dFRSiU1LL8TmUT1HLH4D9Dw45EhHmC--