* [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in app-office/libreoffice: ChangeLog libreoffice-3.4.99.1.ebuild libreoffice-3.5.0.0.ebuild
[not found] ` <CA+NrkpcuKrmKV3ySvc3_TwWVvD6Y6D78O1K6hBXCcx65s1SVTw@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2011-12-17 9:56 99% ` Markos Chandras
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Markos Chandras @ 2011-12-17 9:56 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Tomáš Chvátal; +Cc: gentoo-dev
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 12/17/2011 09:34 AM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> 2011/12/16 Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org>:
>> On 12/12/2011 05:44 PM, Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
>>> scarabeus 11/12/12 17:44:48
>>>
>>> Modified: ChangeLog Added:
>>> libreoffice-3.4.99.1.ebuild Removed: libreoffice-3.5.0.0.ebuild
>>> Log: Remove miss-named beta0. Add beta1 with better name
>>> (presented as downgrade).
>>>
>>> (Portage version: 2.2.0_alpha80/cvs/Linux x86_64, RepoMan
>>> options: --force)
>>>
>>> Revision Changes Path 1.216
>>> app-office/libreoffice/ChangeLog
>>>
>> I know it is a bit late but do you think that commit made sense
>> at that time? It is not the best user experience we can provide
>> when beta releases appear as downgrades. FWIW beta releases
>> should remain masked to avoid useless compilations to slow
>> machines instead of digging through Changelogs to see what
>> happened. Are the beta releases of libreoffice so critical that
>> force you to keep them in the ~testing tree?
>>
> They should be stable enough plus it helps a lot to catch all the
> bugs. Most of those Gentooers reported are being fixed and I think
> it is better to test it during the beta cycle rather than start
> messing with it after final release.
>
> So if you don't want those ebuild in main tree just tell me so and
> I can add only the releases (but then I won't care about the bugs
> much as I do this fixes as part of the upstream QA and don't use
> Gentoo [no worries I compile/runtime test it in the dev tinderbox
> that has gentoo], so at the point of release I should be focusing
> on master branch again).
>
> Tom
>
You misunderstood me. I don't object to beta ebuilds but I wonder if
testing users want to have them by default. Maybe they should be
masked by default and whoever wants the shiny stuff can always unmask
them. Anyway not a big deal. I guess I belong to the minority of
people who do own a single core PC in 2011 :)
- --
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJO7GcxAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCd3oQAMR8gUxPPu+tnPWkOmU5ZedK
B7aCy09P2ecV/BvxDBf1wQOWDb19tpfXT15Rm486+pxkDovP0lhr8hbNklfHXbjE
fB+2JYvEb5qf/zNePCNRc6LC/KaDurIx+z4RzFBOquoZbJM5Z6c8ya+w2q98YmtD
DsB5y1jpq5Fs2eVNjDvmuzDjR0MoMPP1oE9Y0kU4D5ahpH03IdPbyCv/AjR/M3lb
MRezGuRI7EQmrnBNdqZIJpUPHaCioxsyvIeVpw9gkprdQPC4olX8ASd90En41kA6
pnxK1+u1WYJKWJyCZrGROIlws8dBa/mKHn+E+SU10j4kLGIi6dYQGOghPC8g+yop
3E4kgDlJZnXTIpnCszrdkgoqWlDNzmToV6c0D6hvc9itG2aE8vwiSKXHQMp1Lxf7
RGF1/gxyojB9ExUhCwWK7jFBPqhrYb88CpU5fvLRGR8VQ5zq1pM3F5yNoPg4qYdD
U7tUdwm6UPNc9p3QfLSW93FSV4MAEzXhOuj0Kmt9AMr0n+boKyzycm44wm1R31NM
hXoX7bhxP4r2UPRXUJBO+3FGdcxrH4YkcZ3A5yXEV/LwkgtSKsJRzyA5/VQFZCkw
Tt5wvXqRrjW51fVfeY3SU8q/Y0W1pu46Dd1C3Vc3jR1xW8uUegVVJNizmOdOC70y
O7p/tIdyadV9aOjsSKUs
=oIMb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
[not found] <20111212174448.F09FC2004B@flycatcher.gentoo.org>
2011-12-16 20:33 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in app-office/libreoffice: ChangeLog libreoffice-3.4.99.1.ebuild libreoffice-3.5.0.0.ebuild Markos Chandras
[not found] ` <CA+NrkpcuKrmKV3ySvc3_TwWVvD6Y6D78O1K6hBXCcx65s1SVTw@mail.gmail.com>
2011-12-17 9:56 99% ` Markos Chandras
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox