Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009, Petteri Räty wrote:
>
>> 3. Preservation of file modification times
>> - ulm asked us to vote on it if EAPI 3 is not close to release
>> - from the agenda thread there doesn't seem to be a consensus
>> among PM developers on how to best approach this
>
> Actually, my request was more explicit:
>
> If the council accepts mtime preservation, decide which option it
> should be, as outlined in bug 264130 comment 26 [1]:
>
> A: current Portage and Pkgcore behaviour, all mtimes are preserved
> B: optional update of "old" mtimes
> C: mandatory update
>
> Could you add this to the agenda please?
>
> Ulrich
>
> [1] <http://bugs.gentoo.org/264130#c26>
>
1. Discuss why follow up for items from last meeting never happened.
Should we do something to ensure this doesn't happen again?
2. Progress report of EAPI 3 implementation
3. Preservation of file modification times
- ulm asked us to vote on it if EAPI 3 is not close to release
- from the agenda thread there doesn't seem to be a consensus
among PM developers on how to best approach this
- If accepted vote on how to implement it
* Possible approaches: http://bugs.gentoo.org/264130#c26
4. Open discussion
Regards,
Petteri
|
|
