From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Hgka0-00050E-FW for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:42:56 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l3PGg8EV001602; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:42:08 GMT Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.248]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l3PGeId3031831 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:40:18 GMT Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b8so132089ana for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 09:40:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=l5lctJFYXe/b24KOa4Et61mE8A+twe5qnDQ9IVBSm6suQsRiaXP05iIWnkmNJ8UMF4aTuI3TlBkKMMYH7s+YjcflD2RDSFpDZQy6ScHWbTMnHiL+fOU4kYNx69FsY0mpkxAaN791L3cHd93BXCkhQhWiXMmsYWyEbgMrlMA57S0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=IvK8XBdErrlypIgWtGkHEFS1q9J+B0pswBGq93PTGTRXVF7DmpBGBMSZYxqlmQuUD9mBeFXcJuJ+10mCgHeSYpk5Kdya6dbDkCVuPJTLdIsUu6jJZ7ZBTQmD7VK3V3swJc3g2ozNvoYc4n3/u0bMzbJJ4bxlYS7sAcFvMv+XcDY= Received: by 10.100.8.18 with SMTP id 18mr346064anh.1177519217885; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 09:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.107.17 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 09:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <9fce88250704250940j1336ef1ev5beec127d03f7677@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:40:17 +0200 From: "Jakub Moc" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [ANN] Multiple version suffixes illegal in gentoo-x86 In-Reply-To: <1177517569.15811.61.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200704242111.44663.kugelfang@gentoo.org> <200704242154.20811.kugelfang@gentoo.org> <462E6CC4.5000408@gentoo.org> <200704242311.46269.kugelfang@gentoo.org> <462E71E1.7000704@gentoo.org> <9fce88250704242355n3744e592p303fa81c4f9b55f7@mail.gmail.com> <1177517569.15811.61.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> X-Archives-Salt: 8e30d0b5-d1a1-40f6-82f7-e75ad85ab3ad X-Archives-Hash: b8a1037252b55474f68a50433acd59a8 On 4/25/07, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > I don't understand how nobody can see that the *TEMPORARY* injunction > against packages using this versioning scheme was put into place > *BECAUSE* nobody could agree on the solution. > > Actually, nevermind. I digress. You're right. The Council screwed up. > Feel free to give us all our 50 lashings and we'll be done with this > crap. Sigh... It for sure did sound like 'oh noes, the end of the world is near if we don't stop this immediately!!!111!'. Sorry, but I really fail to see the need to use such procedures when the only 2 remaining packages (eh, actually just one, the obsolete transcode ebuild is gone) clearly use multiple version suffixes because it makes a lot of sense to use them and they use them in a pretty sane way (unlike all the crazy _alpha_beta_rc_pre examples given on the relevant bug and elsewhere in this debate). It's not like that the maintainers would use such stuff because 'oh it's so cooool to have multiple version suffixes, I must commit at least one such ebuild'. What's exactly your 'sane version specification' that you ask the maintainers of such ebuilds to move them to 'as soon as possible'? And why's moving them ASAP exactly needed? -- Jakub Moc Email: jakub.moc@gmail.com -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list