From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RDU5p-0006lf-9Q for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 04:37:29 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8E9A221C129; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 04:37:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com (mail-vw0-f53.google.com [209.85.212.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7512821C0E7 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 04:36:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vws19 with SMTP id 19so8983655vws.40 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 21:36:49 -0700 (PDT) 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 Received: by 10.52.182.67 with SMTP id ec3mr16433116vdc.65.1318307808924; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 21:36:48 -0700 (PDT) Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com Received: by 10.52.163.38 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 21:36:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20111010210043.4b31d55e@gentoo.org> References: <4E900E3E.2070202@gentoo.org> <4E905C48.20008@gentoo.org> <20111008151336.GN704@gentoo.org> <4E906D3B.2090200@gentoo.org> <20111010210043.4b31d55e@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 21:36:48 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: SJeP2iqzqN1Fi2rjWi3p33scaZQ Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: media-gfx/pngcrush From: Alec Warner To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 5a9f34df7a1ffc59aac9288c9c3203e0 On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: > On Sat, 08 Oct 2011 18:33:15 +0300 > Samuli Suominen wrote: > >> It's not like fastened lastriting hasn't happened before. I question >> your motives in picking this particular one. It's not like I expected >> cookies for the time I've put into this porting effort, but not this >> "attack" either. > > Then stop trying to remove packages that have an active maintainer. =C2= =A0I could > have sworn that was written down somewhere. I think there was error on both sides here. 1) QA should have some documentation regarding when they will take action. I've gotten Samuli and Diego to note that this would be a good idea; so I hope that gets done in the future. 2) There was miscommunication on the bug. In comment #13 Samuli mentions that 'I'm fine with switching to bundled libpng14 for now, but I'm not going to work on it either.' Hanno then bundles libpng only to be told later in the day that that is wrong. Please try to communicate clearly with each other. 3) Maintainers (and upstreams) are not always responsive. The bug was opened in February and wasn't really worked on until recently. When you are making a treewide change like a lib upgrade you do have a to pick a point where 'enough' people have upgraded and you just break (or mask in this case) everything else. If the folks want the package in the tree they can fix it; thats the whole point of masking (providing a notification and a fix-it interval.) Samuli, this interval is why we mask for 30-60 days also...so try not to shrink the interval without a good reason. -A > > > -- > fonts, gcc-porting, =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0it makes no sense how it makes no sense > toolchain, wxwidgets =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 but i'll take it free anytime > @ gentoo.org =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0EFFD = 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 >