On Sat, 8 Oct 2005, Grobian wrote:

> Because an older package is stable, we are somehow forced to continue 
> stabling newer packages if requested either via a stabling request or 
> security issue. In the first case we have to stable to allow older 
> ebuilds to be cleaned up, in the second we have to table in order to 
> take advantage of the security advisory. See the "Ruby issue" email for 
> how to deal with packages that obviously noone knows what to do with.
> 
> > Sorry if I somehow missed an e-mail detailing this;
> 
> You haven't, it was in my initial proposal.  You trigger me to put this 
> somewhere on the web for reference.

I think you are referring to this proposal?

"I propose to keep the following keywording rules for whatever we do from 
now:
1) only keyword new packages ~ppc-macos; don't stable them after a month 
2) only stable new ebuilds if this is required by security stuff and we 
   have an older ebuild that is stable"

Maybe you can add,

3) if need be, a non-system package may be stabled, even if it has 
   collisions.

and then add autoconf-2.59 to the Panther base system for the progressive 
profile, and mask ruby from the Panther conservative profile.

-f
-- 
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list