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 7D4B013877A for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 06:56:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 97689E0954; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 06:56:46 +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 A649BE0814 for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 06:56:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from phjr-macbookpro.local (159-205-221-144.adsl.inetia.pl [159.205.221.144]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: phajdan.jr) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 37C633400E4 for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 06:56:44 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <53E08018.9040309@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 08:56:24 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?IlBhd2XFgiBIYWpkYW4sIEpyLiI=?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 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] Status of ppc and ppc64 teams. References: <53E00322.20101@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <53E00322.20101@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="O2NavOqBlbP6if0NEmpSxuHqRian4lKrC" X-Archives-Salt: bcfa3818-651d-4a62-94b4-f4dbd926a666 X-Archives-Hash: 4e6354a59b93c635fb6046d25665c745 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --O2NavOqBlbP6if0NEmpSxuHqRian4lKrC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 8/5/14, 12:03 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > The bigger problem is actually KEYWORDREQ's so we are going to > request maintainers not ever drop ~ppc or ~ppc64 even when they feel > a major bump has occurred, eg a deep rewrite to a library. We know=20 > this is living dangerously but we'll going to make use of the > community in this regard --- either someone will bug us on a broken > ~ppc/~ppc64 package, or we'll catch it at stabilization. FWIW I don't drop KEYWORDS for bumps considered major. However, sometimes a major bump means a new dependency not keyworded for given arch, and in that case I would drop KEYWORDS. Note that most packages I (co-)maintain are not keyworded ~ppc/ppc64, but this has happened e.g. for ~arm. Pawe=C5=82 --O2NavOqBlbP6if0NEmpSxuHqRian4lKrC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJT4IAhAAoJEE8aJVXqcZkdZv4P/iOY28v4RRwfnC68qSsb8NwL 4sr3ZOE7ACSWiSSKj2WXdWnelx0chzXOafEYBEpNrWKaQFUbFrLjN6zmQ5EophU/ iZZQXukNn4ejDKgRIOOcEubUMZqvuioWWIt7ieIcIZKPrLd9xGQvo+C+0gQF5wHq Z1vhxeQ42pkvwVnlpzl0KBpis40q918GDVFyLox8GenhL4bhPtXBG73AIQ45tVeC aa8pw4B95+x+PsvOtETVbnVDNjwbOOAnboPEdSb21W9zYpstiPwEhOHoJwMjbPq6 +CHrJEvGc6qB/vZ0OAL1EcqP6SZ9z1HOiv9GT1p7T/amOi/8ROiVrrxzJolrQuuA sFsZHhVw+4+V9Cno0zcXTam8n5dw64+jEdWNJiKuhj1cglxOWwoTW/jrljBfgDB1 zI0Orb15w1b5/Vk/le1J6uP42dootExBgq8bFSIikmcqOcTWm8ut450ct8L4pX1t DF/U/JiyDYVseS6yvB5Jz0tuf/MI+bbMT3vU2HxCn5bLkJTlTYKjXcELcnQtJpnB tB7XDXIOHk9oLBsHseR3v9FFcSL0XSHUVd1ifTYER07R3N1SCEswKEkvMg1+juyx A31YKVVpOuLpjXMR7oiWTNEX6D5wxb87KoJ8tBnj0FAXdZZzXG1LvnOpcRMlrHHz Sd2P/3nF4HEolDsYgNo2 =9aO5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --O2NavOqBlbP6if0NEmpSxuHqRian4lKrC--