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 <gentoo-user+bounces-86809-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1L4iyz-0004OC-4L
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:28:37 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ECD16E0824;
Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:28:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from yw-out-1718.google.com (yw-out-1718.google.com [74.125.46.153])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2C9AE0824
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:28:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 5so969788ywm.46
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:28:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to
:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
bh=Szhx3k+C05NJjd/wglsk1hkwCsbBr3nGVz4PdfJrt6U=;
b=iQsqy9WyTFWaWr3LzWRmrOfMpv4+bQmzhd0JZ5hblkXDAfbVbA1hDOCs4tUMuymbX1
JqmsTumGEVTuncJwV1ExCXoRsvwVYhSzlPv0LJJIzmx9LyJcHM1XMdO9Cy6bM9uz7yYu
fyEpADKx7NMTJm46sI/NlaEDFzrdPZIFI5Kvw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
:references;
b=OrLHOvpxj5Ap8GztkgyymifM9rvFWBVkvXgRGMhZI3Fqv/ONjpDetXG57k/LmVkbiz
s+GWplnfnLwd8Wv6RRaI83GcrAjMjX0ZvtbiphFCLamEKwSCpfaM+hRzyTdE8ANkyGu/
AsLmouXE2mWppFgmQQOZixh8iSMd+lRuzHAzs=
Received: by 10.103.193.13 with SMTP id v13mr1261824mup.125.1227562112929;
Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:28:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.103.90.19 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:28:32 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <fecdbac60811241328g7f9d0fd9nf1ddf821d5736a3b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:28:32 +0200
From: "Arttu V." <arttuv69@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Masking for Educational Purposes only ?
In-Reply-To: <492AFA7F.9080005@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <200811241611.47787.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
<492AFA7F.9080005@gmail.com>
X-Archives-Salt: 788846ca-5ec4-47f5-a90a-b850f9ac0029
X-Archives-Hash: 09a7347c76cfb08caee11f67e8d431f3
On 11/24/08, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, why? If you want to test 2.2 instead, you can do it. It's not
> blocking you from anything.
Yes, before the change the only thing blocking portage 2.2 was ~arch.
Now it requires the bigger tool, Thor's Hammer of Unmasking +5 (+15
against portage devs and other undead? ;) ).
> He wants users to test *more* a given version, and that in turn will
> probably benefit us all. It's a psychological trick, maybe, but an
> absolutely innocent one. In fact, once you know that, you *should* jump
> the bandwagon and help test the previous version.
Let's think for a moment about the logic and psychology underlying
this situation.
Why have these people upgraded to unstable portage 2.2 in the first
place? Just to "test it out"? To show off ricing to the debian and
ubuntu kids running their ancient stable stuff? No, it's the package
manager for crying out loud! My guess is that most have packages
explicitly requiring them to run the newer portage, packages like
anything related to kde4.
Will such people help with testing of 2.1 on their normal system? No.
So how many new testers did this actually acquire? And how much work
was wasted unmasking the packages and ranting on mailing lists?
My guess is zero new testers and a lot of time wasted with hundreds or
thousands of people whipping out their text editors and unmasking the
package, then going off ranting on mailing lists, forums and irc
channels.
So, yes, I'd tend to agree with Mr McKinnon and Mr Jarausch on this
issue. Something was bad in this execution of this "need more testers"
-- regardless of the possible original good intentions.
/semi-serious-rant
--
Arttu V.