| 1 |
Branko Badrljica schrieb: |
| 2 |
> Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> the mailing list is not bugzilla. any complaints you have about |
| 5 |
>> USE=oldnet have nothing to do with this thread. it's a bug and should |
| 6 |
>> be treated as such. |
| 7 |
>> -mike |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Which is why I have posted here to gripe about having documented such |
| 11 |
> changes in future. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I was told that new openrc is surely fine because it works for some |
| 14 |
> group of people, that obviously includes developer. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> It is not enough, and please, don't keep such things in the future in |
| 17 |
> more or less closed circles of your pals. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Even simple "WARNING!!! Big changes, untested, not(yet) documented!" |
| 20 |
> would be nice. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> I know what arch~ _should_ mean, but you know what it actually means. |
| 23 |
> So, a little bit of pragmatic flexibility here would certainly decrease |
| 24 |
> amount of raining urine and improve Gentoo's likability. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Using TESTING packages actually means the above big warning. But do you really want to annoy every |
| 27 |
user with such a message everywhere, just because some people expect TESTING tree to be similar save |
| 28 |
as stable tree? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Thomas Sachau |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
Archives