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 4.43) id 1EJARH-0006k3-Ql for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 24 Sep 2005 13:51:40 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j8ODiUOV000273; Sat, 24 Sep 2005 13:44:30 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j8ODgnd8016048 for ; Sat, 24 Sep 2005 13:42:50 GMT Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EJAP1-00019j-6P for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 24 Sep 2005 13:49:19 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1EJAMl-000063-EG for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sat, 24 Sep 2005 15:47:07 +0200 Received: from ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.230.97.182]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 24 Sep 2005 15:46:59 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 24 Sep 2005 15:46:59 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: first council meeting Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 06:44:47 -0700 Organization: Sometimes Message-ID: References: <20050915205149.GB22270@vino.zko.hp.com> <200509161659.56603.vapier@gentoo.org> <1126907853.5006.98.camel@lycan.lan> <200509161817.01181.vapier@gentoo.org> 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=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: cc7ed022-c1a5-4bc0-aac2-976bbf63c2f2 X-Archives-Hash: 3de5bb2b2367ea0a8c928d696f110fd6 Mike Frysinger posted <200509161817.01181.vapier@gentoo.org>, excerpted below, on Fri, 16 Sep 2005 18:17:01 -0400: >> We still have KEYWORDS="-*". Sure, I know many do not like it, and if >> something was decided in regards to it, I missed it, but it is generally >> seen as 'less severe' than a package.mask'd mask, and its local to the >> package, so should not get stale. > > that would address the 'arch teams marking ahead of maintainer' issue, but in > general, i think we need a testing mask of some sort separate from > package.mask where we can put things like modular X, new KDE betas, new GNOME > betas, e17 packages, etc... Exactly. I'm a full ~arch user, and regularly load packages such as gcc4 (including snapshots once in awhile, plus the accompanying glibc and binutils) and kde and xorg snapshots, as well as pre versions of baselayout and portage, at times. I'd DEFINITELY be more convenient if I could easily separate the security and confirmed system munching stuff in package.mask out from these testing packages. ? arch would be great, here, as it would mean I could simply package.keyword as necessary, rather than (1) package.unmask, then sometimes (2) copying to overlay, and (3) adding ~arch and redigesting so portage will work with it. However, a testing.mask and parallel testing.unmask in /etc/portage, would work fine as well, provided when they were used, ~archs were carried over, to prevent having to overlay the package simply to add the appropriate keyword. (Being amd64 and having some packages do amd64 conditionals, I don't like adding ~x86 or -* to package.keywords, so overlay it has to be.) The point has been made that snapshots/pres/rcs and the like should never make it to ~arch, because they are never reasonable candidates for arch-stable. Point taken. However, that's certainly far easier for testers such as myself, than having to move a hundred kde-split-pkgs to overlay and keyword them, to be able to test the latest kde snapshot, then do the exact /same/ thing a week or two later for the /next/ one. For devs and users alike, an upstream package testing area (to parallel ~arch which is effectively ebuild testing and stable candidate area) that was separate and distinct from known actively harmful package.mask, would be /very/ useful, giving both advanced users and devs a way to know with no doubt what was considered ready for testing of the upstream-package, as deployed on Gentoo. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list