1 |
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:35:07 -0800 |
2 |
Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> But if there are archs that would rather not move to modular X, that's |
5 |
> their prerogative. The way I look at it is, sometimes change comes at |
6 |
> a price. I really hope they aren't any archs I use though, because I |
7 |
> take a certain amount of pride in making the best and newest X |
8 |
> available. When people remask it, it's like they're directly battling |
9 |
> against the whole reason I'm involved in Gentoo. |
10 |
|
11 |
As an arch team, SPARC would like to move to modular X. However if |
12 |
packages are broken by this unmasking, it *will* be masked on SPARC |
13 |
until such a time that this is fixed. Also a complaint will be filed |
14 |
with developer relations and QA as this blatantly and knowingly defies |
15 |
the policies regarding keywording that were put in place to |
16 |
intentionally prohibit this kind of behavior. |
17 |
|
18 |
I'm not trying to be a party pooper here, but breaking the portage tree |
19 |
should never be an acceptable answer. |
20 |
|
21 |
Cheers, |
22 |
-- |
23 |
Jason Wever |
24 |
Gentoo/Sparc Team Co-Lead |