From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-68241-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE3BA138B74
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun,  2 Nov 2014 15:06:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 494BAE0C22;
	Sun,  2 Nov 2014 15:06:33 +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 5A693E0A0B
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun,  2 Nov 2014 15:06:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.4.5] (blfd-4db00044.pool.mediaWays.net [77.176.0.68])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: hasufell)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 24893340444;
	Sun,  2 Nov 2014 15:06:29 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <54564870.8000502@gentoo.org>
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2014 16:06:24 +0100
From: hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.8.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
CC: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] more help needed with gcc-4.8 stabilization, chromium
 starts heavily using C++11
References: <54391B0E.3050701@gentoo.org>	<5454FE7B.7060601@gentoo.org>	<CAGfcS_=nZv2uS7y2TBpoeEKKMnU4L6zPBeQJ2kNh5pdoqodH6Q@mail.gmail.com>	<201411011930.56393.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <CAGfcS_=ncJvE6GtaDmo4S6jEX7PFDz4q4cPq17XPnFVbCPLG6A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGfcS_=ncJvE6GtaDmo4S6jEX7PFDz4q4cPq17XPnFVbCPLG6A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Archives-Salt: e7fb326e-25ed-4815-aebf-9e22a419c970
X-Archives-Hash: 05627fa9d267cb7cb2918901e8551df0

On 11/02/2014 03:08 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> 
> Well, nothing is ever ideal, but as issues come up they are being
> dealt with now.  I can't think of any situations where somebody has
> been able to block out new contributors in the last year or two.
> Sure, there have been a few attempts, but we've squashed them.
> 

You are being specific now. But the problem is not that specific. It
just manifests in specific conflicts. Are you saying the solution is to
fix these conflicts as they come up and don't worry about the reasons
they came up in the first place?

As I said. All that does is slow down the regression. It doesn't even
keep status quo.