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 1REPT8-0000QH-8a for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:53:22 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 55E2721C16D; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:53:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f53.google.com (mail-bw0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ED5221C0E3 for ; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:52:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkbzt12 with SMTP id zt12so2206816bkb.40 for ; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:52:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=6SGOZCrR0cRuXoWrMTJo0nNIOXX2ym8ADlueGCUWrU8=; b=Wuv1V9RquY18nKuV8WPkilG5UK4jJD1vlPDU0FhhrJta2kAa0gsC358Le+FN9BQzMC By11MkNEgf9rJLGi7etnd3opTCv/AeBj03b0LM8FL6ZVeCzryVVPyMTp/7/LO4uGUjsg /G9bj+/3g5KvBdAkdyGy1//KHbxupwy5usjIU= 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 10.204.7.198 with SMTP id e6mr3732503bke.80.1318528357224; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:52:37 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.72.195 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:52:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E9723A1.4080603@gentoo.org> References: <20111001170259.E4D702004B@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <4E96226D.8060807@gentoo.org> <4E9629A7.3080405@gentoo.org> <201110122019.02773.vapier@gentoo.org> <4E965A76.1040109@gentoo.org> <4E96FF2F.8090705@gentoo.org> <4E9723A1.4080603@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:52:37 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: VM9smooGgpQISANRpbcM8K48tHg Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 1a4d61997db34596f92bb04f43633ddc On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > Merely saying if we had some documentation snippet, or an end-quiz > question for this, QA could more easily/faster revoke access if someone > were to do this intentionally in tree. This could be minor motivation > for me to write such snippet, but it's definately not near top on my TODO. I think that something that is worth an official policy is whether in fact "<" or "=" dependencies are acceptable, or in general when they are acceptable. That isn't to say that we have to enumerate all possibilities, but there should be guidelines. I don't think there really is a clear consensus on this. It is definitely a can of worms and I don't think black-and-white is the right approach to take. While slotting libraries is often an option, that gets a lot messier when you're talking about things like header files. Rich