| 1 |
On 01/11/2010 06:30 PM, Arnaud Launay wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> As a newsmaster, I'm a bit concerned by this. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Yeah, inn seems like a really high-profile package to mask for removal. |
| 6 |
It would be conspicuous in its absence. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Would it make sense to post on -dev BEFORE masking packages like this? |
| 9 |
I'm sure there are lots of people who would chip in before something |
| 10 |
like this dies. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Right now lots of users are going to get errors due to a masked package |
| 13 |
until somebody takes the initiative to fix it. I suspect that nobody |
| 14 |
wants to poke their head up and risk getting it shot off by doing |
| 15 |
something like that... |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Perhaps Gentoo needs a little more of Wikipedia's "Be Bold" attitude and |
| 18 |
a little less of their "delete first and ask questions later" attitude. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Note - I'm not suggesting the problem shouldn't be fixed - I'm just |
| 21 |
suggesting that in this case the solution is worse than the original |
| 22 |
problem. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Rich |
Archives