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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1G2r2w-00034A-8K for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 14:59:39 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k6IEwm3k005579; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 14:58:48 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6IEtXKI023045 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 14:55:34 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1C6064C49 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 13:52:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10570-15 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 13:52:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53D8164C41 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 13:51:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1G2pzF-0008WE-DW for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:51:45 +0200 Received: from ppp-62-245-160-184.dynamic.mnet-online.de ([62.245.160.184]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:51:45 +0200 Received: from genstef by ppp-62-245-160-184.dynamic.mnet-online.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:51:45 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Stefan Schweizer Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: New category: net-voip Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:51:14 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1153229677.15037.6.camel@onyx> 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=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-62-245-160-184.dynamic.mnet-online.de User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Sender: news X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.508 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.091, BAYES_00=-2.599] X-Spam-Score: -2.508 X-Spam-Level: X-Archives-Salt: 71231ae4-50cd-4e0f-8e4d-6ba14b930366 X-Archives-Hash: 6c13533e9217bdb02c06dca57552042f Ned Ludd wrote: > Creation of a new categories is fine. pkg moves are bad. > See the countless other posting on this subject of why pkg > moves are bad. yeah new packages is my primary concern. >> Any objections, problems with the plan, comments? > > Sure I'll step up and say I object to the part of your plan which > involves a shitton of pkgmoves. Moving pkgs from existing categories > into another category causes numerous problems that portage can't solve > as easy as the rest of us might think so please just don't do that > part. I've got no objection to the creation of a new category for *new* > packages. I talked with you in IRC about this more. We will do the package moves only when a bump occurs and will make sure that stable as well as ~arch get an updated ebuild. Best regards, Stefan -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list