From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Klgyl-00066c-Oa for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:29:44 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 45C1FE02D0; Fri, 3 Oct 2008 09:29:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17921E02D0 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2008 09:29:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E561F64EAC for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2008 09:29:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.824 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.824 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.775, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] 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 bw8pB7LFRwHC for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2008 09:29:34 +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 30A4D64ABF for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2008 09:29:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KlgyY-0004fp-3p for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:29:30 +0000 Received: from ip68-231-12-43.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.12.43]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:29:30 +0000 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-12-43.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:29:30 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Testing is not a valid reason to package.mask Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 09:29:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20081002222435.35768855@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> <1223017599.29403.2.camel@localhost> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-12-43.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 40cefd5c-5ebd-4ec5-bbd4-c94de2c36588 X-Archives-Hash: f80f100c27ef8a82c11567d6c27c2f0a Mart Raudsepp posted 1223017599.29403.2.camel@localhost= , excerpted below, on Fri, 03 Oct 2008 10:06:39 +0300: > Of course when that initial testing is done with helping users, the > reason could be modified to tell things broke and what the tracking bug > is, or unmasked if it works fine with other packages. >From previous discussions on this, that's really the point (besides the=20 one about not masking it if testing is needed, which toolchain for=20 instance pretty much has to do anyway). If it has a tracking bug, it has= =20 the necessary info. If it's just "masked for testing", the necessary=20 info isn't there. This helps me as a user who often does that sort of testing, too. Masked= =20 for testing simply isn't that useful. A tracking bug, where I can see=20 how that testing is progressing and what other sorts of stuff I might=20 expect to have issues with if I DO test, now THAT's actual practical=20 info! Simply "masked for testing" is little better than no comment at=20 all, or than a package revision bump without a changelog entry telling me= =20 what the big deal was that was worth the revision. (That's another=20 irritating one, but fortunately it doesn't happen so often any more. =20 Thanks guys!) --=20 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