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 1SOyul-0008EL-JP for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:17:51 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2EFA6E07B4; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:17:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com (mail-wi0-f175.google.com [209.85.212.175]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C94FAE07B4 for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:17:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wibhn6 with SMTP id hn6so2891065wib.10 for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 15:17:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; bh=M8nGU4Fb1cj9Tv4L0DOfnVIyGqyRM3stGexDdH1RBZM=; b=USIUbS5Nld5slnuylkz3djcTdsSuhCRbQ3nI7ct7ZhBJlAwDOunBaEkDoyoZMWxzWZ XzNrbpoTasiq3E+091F3t1twZ9cIpTXNa/99Ba1tyEIjjti86DwTQhdRJhRC/8OVPaFg fNqkdbpf55uXpSPwpNqSDSGZyjN9Hh/O7rNchF5AOXE/tikB0HwnKlhqCy8JEC2sTgDE VOc0p63+LHAg4wQxc0SrGmN+0a75CJrFJ4GaoC2BzY2gBnNvkYhc02g2Dzj2itBly0oc q+Bf337ggvsFFXw8OLp5H7CXJcEJsrWbMr0he1kvFRvBbxbtFeGiCNiWf0pLGKagTzMJ PTWg== Received: by 10.180.88.199 with SMTP id bi7mr13737wib.12.1335824261967; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 15:17:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (cpc13-broo7-2-0-cust130.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com. [82.9.16.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k6sm31508390wie.9.2012.04.30.15.17.40 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 30 Apr 2012 15:17:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 23:15:12 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] Re: EAPI 5 Message-ID: <20120430231512.74e964a2@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <201205010014.21031.dilfridge@gentoo.org> References: <20120415021641.1858ffde@gentoo.org> <20120427215824.3382e682@pomiocik.lan> <20120427211227.613709a2@googlemail.com> <201205010014.21031.dilfridge@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Package Manager Specification discussions X-BeenThere: gentoo-pms@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/A2a8RHlffVVtMaFVKu/w6E8"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 976f890a-c063-41ca-8a9a-5f5cd7b4d308 X-Archives-Hash: f33855ed065efc801fe4159c42224787 --Sig_/A2a8RHlffVVtMaFVKu/w6E8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 1 May 2012 00:14:15 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > * package.use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.force support, as > discussed on gentoo-dev (there and on IRC feedback was pretty much > positive) >=20 > http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_6c492ae43ad7c70cef6aa8ac34911ad= f.xml I'm against this one in a "quick" EAPI, unless you can get a reference implementation and extensive testing on possible use scenarios done in time. I strongly suspect this will end up having the problems that REQUIRED_USE had when it was shoved in at the last minute without anyone having properly tried it out... --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/A2a8RHlffVVtMaFVKu/w6E8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk+fDvMACgkQ96zL6DUtXhFopACeJ186NLPk7GQ0pHDapjs7Qe+j xT0AoLLSk63CFHVzP9FGdnx7a+1P3P1L =aZT8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/A2a8RHlffVVtMaFVKu/w6E8--