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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-47899-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1R7iS9-0002ek-4H
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:44:42 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 09E5121C0FF;
	Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:44:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-gw0-f53.google.com (mail-gw0-f53.google.com [74.125.83.53])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61DDC21C102
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:43:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by gwj20 with SMTP id 20so5278305gwj.40
        for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:43:58 -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:from:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=Lf+NRMz6pQ4z+ZjxRU6AQT2HbIlq+ifxJJrt1ERn/qA=;
        b=wdrs+roriRGkGciPCqC9VhAVR3VBaMBIoU6XaQjgXLAr5iR98xLWkkjc0tMkR98tfu
         /d/nXsNlpjziBVaGi+IrKUznKLlHmSCZL43x3lyNSZS50a8EuZVZRVlq1c9eQQIu4CtT
         zh94dA5LbWk7k7nSOMvSfTxhDBdcrPYP+8Pi8=
Received: by 10.42.146.138 with SMTP id j10mr6013223icv.105.1316933038752;
 Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
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
Sender: vapierfilter@gmail.com
Received: by 10.42.229.6 with HTTP; Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAGfcS_mQKsiQz-ycP_7teqpEnb7NpNcRaJ_7Ro6S9rdeNZa-FQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <j5iukv$v5h$1@dough.gmane.org> <201109240002.56070.dilfridge@gentoo.org>
 <201109240110.43747.vapier@gentoo.org> <pan.2011.09.24.06.49.31@cox.net>
 <CAJaTeTosSC5NpuGgaVD0umOMg-yvvF3nMh_NvJN4pdP+bg0ysQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAGfcS_mQKsiQz-ycP_7teqpEnb7NpNcRaJ_7Ro6S9rdeNZa-FQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 02:43:38 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: -VsRQrKZT7RvI2OTDCTkL_tC16o
Message-ID: <CAJaTeTorkLqndmMdwxAcOXr6iwTMCoyAv2TqDWuad-pfwKwfZw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: zlib breakage
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: 
X-Archives-Hash: 411085d47016ad51f70d2b2c71215f7c

On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 14:18, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:10 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 02:49, Duncan wrote:
>>> Unfortunately, locking a bug to kill the whining is likely to have rath=
er
>>> more negative effects than one might have anticipated. =A0One would thi=
nk
>>> comment locking would be a logical enough extension to have been
>>> implemented by now; perhaps this is why it hasn't been. =A0(Full visibi=
lity
>>> locking is of course different, security bugs and all.)
>>
>> i don't see any negative effects so far.
>
> Well, you can probably count the 22 emails preceding this one, and the
> 22 that are sure to follow...

i believe the posts were going to be made regardless.  if i hadn't
shut down the bug temporarily, then it'd have been on there instead.
perhaps after enough time of me saying "no", it'd have come over to
the list anyways.  it's a crap shoot either way.

> User-rel is definitely the appropriate way to handle things like this.
> =A0There are legitimate technical disagreements over the best way to
> handle this situation, and I can't approve of Nikos's tendency to
> personalize things in the bug. =A0On the other hand, simply telling him
> to get lost is likely to just lead to more flames/etc.

i'd rather not waste more people's time, but using userrel probably
would have satisfied that desire better than temporarily locking the
bug.
-mike