From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-33388-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1KzdRW-0001VN-UR
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:33:04 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1B1E7E034F;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:33:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com (fk-out-0910.google.com [209.85.128.184])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2E15E034F
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:33:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 18so3967395fks.2
        for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 12:32:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender
         :to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references
         :x-google-sender-auth;
        bh=xih8X0whQ0ZVvU69Q1EIxHqZBZb8gZuWciH0hI/4pVc=;
        b=UYNSNiResD8owzhOkQ4/s4P1eOglR4UDyJ1wObyxGzZ0W/pdKwO26lg98oPe3B17I1
         IUzx73QvSJpDPFU6mEcUIMxJOi3+WaIXHXQbu3fMH3ouKJWqVqP/2OSFEuTFheMuPxSm
         B4eBc1O8kTJ5jsgr5Pc4IJgWGmvZXB/RTR8L8=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
         :references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=gStF5cAT32sjO51wPphSs3IeERg+/JXlFfq4DEYrRofclO0gTeQbY2bOoko0VFW9L0
         ffs5f4bJZ3AiXBJcNvEJukcXqmmWqm+GT9X7zuRN1EqXBDRGArHltpiDk3A865UYD9bT
         xfocC3vfphVJJONezBiH/7h53ny5QhgW9Mc3k=
Received: by 10.181.197.2 with SMTP id z2mr2229639bkp.65.1226349179648;
        Mon, 10 Nov 2008 12:32:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.180.249.19 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 12:32:59 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <6d2ed5bd0811101232s67829037rd5f83c2097ef55a8@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 14:32:59 -0600
From: "Steev Klimaszewski" <steev@gentoo.org>
Sender: steevatgentoo@gmail.com
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
In-Reply-To: <1226341422.16453.3.camel@localhost>
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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20081110181334.GD7038@aerie.halcy0n.com>
	 <1226341422.16453.3.camel@localhost>
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 72e24a280dee04ce
X-Archives-Salt: 9f39611a-5957-431c-8e4b-0f801f6a8749
X-Archives-Hash: 1f52d6a2fc87b796b2e75caccb578aac

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Mart Raudsepp <leio@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On E, 2008-11-10 at 13:13 -0500, Mark Loeser wrote:
>> Removing Stable Ebuilds
>>
>> If an ebuild meets the time criteria above, and there are no technical issues
>> preventing stabilization, then the maintainer MAY choose to delete an older
>> version even if it is the most recent stable version for a particular arch.
>
> Even if that is a package that other packages depend on? Lets say I want
> to delete an ancient version of gtk+, but arch ABC has that as the only
> stable ebuild, while the rest are ~ABC. Do I remove it, as I may, and
> break the whole stable tree of arch ABC, unkeyword hundreds of other
> packages, or I'm just allowed to remove it but should really apply a
> common sense as usual and you don't want to go into details in this
> document?

*MAY* choose - you don't *have* to do it - I'd prefer something along
the lines of, may stablize it - if after a minimum of 30 days - maybe
90 days max - if the arch team hasn't had enough time to stablize
it... when will they ever?