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 1QeunB-0006mt-I6 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2011 20:03:21 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BC22BE04ED; Thu, 7 Jul 2011 20:01:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail2.viabit.com (mail2.viabit.com [65.246.80.16]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 844B9E04ED for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2011 20:01:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.1.1.204] (unknown [65.213.236.244]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.viabit.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1066737AFE for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2011 16:01:42 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=orlitzky.com; s=mail2; t=1310068902; bh=H7d+h2wIOGECnSzTq0SvGhSu39H1jCJVR1AubQ6okXk=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=V9cOM6xEAXDmWyGi9A+79ZRCzmBU2xEDhgWD1ExC9bw+4TFGJnNbDczahqCvK/9Ma /8Y3YbZHU94jdxS6na4CtGGk7eYO2vcOVzbGLISwJuS/5lToRCJ593yUKdj4VefFA9 mpiiL881jTbvd6H9bMwionUWPK8koH7pls1OZYyc= Message-ID: <4E1610A5.2070506@orlitzky.com> Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 16:01:41 -0400 From: Michael Orlitzky User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110509 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.10 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo wiping out Gtk 2 support from packages that support it? References: <5098158.chQrAVvWtm@nazgul> <4E15F000.7040806@orlitzky.com> <4221035.bOF7vk8orf@nazgul> In-Reply-To: <4221035.bOF7vk8orf@nazgul> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 714e2d7b10a4937caf87a2f28bad87f6 On 07/07/11 15:36, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > And what about gnome? Does that not impose a fantastic testing burden, > alongside which gnome-mplayer is small in comparison? Yes, but the value of one's time isn't relative. If you'll allow me to make up the numbers, just because it takes a month of time to test Gnome doesn't mean that the day it would take to test gnome-mplayer is any less valuable. In those eight hours you can still drink the same number of beers, read the same number of books, or -- hell, in this case -- fix the same number of bugs in other packages. > How about the devs relook at this and do it sanely. When the major > consumer of gtk+ (gnome itself) has a stable gtk+-3 very in stable, > then other packages follow suit, not before. I don't think anyone would disagree that this is nice to have; you just have to find someone to do the work. Writing ebuilds is fun, setting up test environments and recompiling all day is not.