Re: [gentoo-dev] mozilla{-bin}/gecko-sdk masking

[Ned Ludd]

On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 22:30 -0500, Jory A. Pratt wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Ned Ludd wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 19:39 -0500, Jory A. Pratt wrote:
> >> As many are aware by now mozilla{-bin} are full of security issues. I
> >> will be p.masking them tonight along with gecko-sdk. This is gonna cause
> >> some issues with stable tree I am aware of this. As packages break
> >> please reference bug http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=137665 If
> >> you are able to provide a patch or diff against problem please provide
> >> and I or the dev/herd that maintaines will test and apply it as soon as
> >> possible.
> >>
> >> I was left with no option as packages are still being updated in the
> >> tree without being ported to seamonkey/firefox. Sorry for any
> >> inconvience this may cause you the user, but devs should be held
> >> responsible as they have had plenty of time to work out the problems.
> >
> > I've been using seamonkey for a few weeks now without problems and am
> > pleased with it but I don't believe a word you say about having no
> > choice or devs having the option to fix stuff. You always had the
> > option of porting patches. You always have options! You have held back
> > taking the seadonkey out of p.masking till the very last min then
> > forced an un-smooth upgrade path on everybody. Please don't shift the
> > blame on others.. We have ~arch and blockers for stuff like this...
> >
> > Please don't take this as a personal attack... I'm just calling shit as
> > I see it.
> >
> >
>
> If this is how ya feel back port the damn patches. I do not have time to
> back port patches for every security issues that remains. I have fought
> to keep security from masking it before now. Maybe you would feel better
> taking over mozilla/seamonkey/gecko-sdk? If all the bug mail over the
> last week is not enough to move the tree to were it should be already
> for seamonkey as I have requested, then the responsibility does fall on
> package maintainer.
>
>
> For those who are unaware just follow all the blockers you will end up
> at security were there has been comments about back porting patches but
> you have not seen solar make any mention of who/when will or has the
> time to do the back porting.


My reply to your orig mail was intended to be off list.

Lack of time is fully understandable.  It's a big package and takes a
long time to compile and debug. More time than many are willing to
devote.. Trust me I thank for you doing what you do and have no interest
what so ever in maintaining the pkg either. I just feel that mozilla is
a pretty major package and seamonkey if unmasked current has not been
unmasked for very long ~10 hrs as of this mail. As long as the two
existed in the tree and blocked each other there seems a little less of
a rush to be so quick to p.mask mozilla itself till the bugs are fleshed
out of the seamonkey pkg. Most maintainers put stuff into ~arch so bugs
can be worked out. You jumped it right to stable out of a p.masking 
Shrug.. It's your pkg feel free to maintain it however the fsck you
want..

-- 
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o>
Gentoo Linux

-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list