| 1 |
Joshua Jackson wrote: |
| 2 |
> In the oldest version of the package (as all these were), I don't see |
| 3 |
> much point in the change. They will be removed within a fairly short |
| 4 |
> amount of time. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Fairly short meaning what, 6 months? A lot of old ebuilds tend to stick |
| 7 |
around forever. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> Secondary, you are suggesting that any dev who comes |
| 10 |
> across a modular x problem to fix it..even if this is a direct |
| 11 |
> violation of the guidelines set forth in the documentation? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Which guidelines, exactly? I'm having trouble finding these vague |
| 14 |
guidelines to which you refer. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I found one that said "If you make an internal, stylistic change to the |
| 17 |
ebuild that does not change any of the installed files, then there is no |
| 18 |
need to bump the revision number." |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I also found "When a package version has proved stable for sufficient |
| 21 |
time and the Gentoo maintainer of the package is confident that the |
| 22 |
upgrade will not break a regular Gentoo user's machine, then it can be |
| 23 |
moved from ~ARCH to ARCH," which, to my reading, can also apply to |
| 24 |
transferring ~arch modular X deps to stable. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Thanks, |
| 27 |
Donnie |
Archives