Re: [gentoo-dev] OT noise (Was: Profile masking and profiles package.mask)

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Sat, 2006-09-30 at 19:02 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
> So, I'd kinda appreciate if concerned folks (including portage and
> relevant affected arches) were involved in this discussion, instead of
> sneaking the changes in under QA disguise.

Umm... I already took care of x86/alpha, both of which I am on the arch
team for, as well as added release@ to CC, since most of the profiles
involved were made by Release Engineering and the architecture teams.
There were a few people that I missed in the discussions, namely
Gentoo/*BSD.  This was not on purpose but more an oversight.  I tried to
kindly ask you the other day on IRC to add items to the bug that needed
to be done, rather than continue with your current course of action of
trying to lay blame to everyone when they make a mistake.  At this
point, I'll have to agree with Mike by saying that if you're not going
to assist on a technical level with the bug and discussion, to please
not comment, at all.

Diego, a few people from the portage team have said that they dislike
using version masks in the packages file.  I agree with them completely.
It causes quite a few problems.  To be simple, all masks should be in
package.mask rather than in packages.  This has been the case since the
per-profile package.mask was introduced.  Unfortunately, as with many
things in the portage world, we can't just turn off "old" functionality
over night due to the amount of system that we would break.  This means
there needs to be a transition period.  The fact that something works
now really is more of a side-effect than an expected behavior.

I plan on going through all of the "default-linux" profiles and cleaning
them up in this regard, after speaking with each arch team that seems
affected by the change.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
Gentoo Foundation