List Archive: gentoo-project
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 23:39:51 -0700
"Alec Warner" <email@example.com> wrote:
> I wish to add a few more fields:
> Effective-Date: Date the mask goes into effect. This means you can
> mask stuff in the future.
> Expiration-Date: Date the mask ends. This means you can have masks
> that expire after a given time.
No and no. I don't see a point in either of those, or since when is
(absolute) time a relevant factor for masking status?
> If Expiration-Date was mandatory, we could essentially have a system
> that cleans out mask files by removing expired masks.
Please provide use cases where a mask would expire at a given date and
not based on the state of the tree (analog for Effective-Date).
> Another thing I wish to address is the addition of entries in
> package.mask at the top of the file. I think this restriction just
> makes automation more difficult. I can't just append new entries to
> the end of the file, I have to read in the file and figure out by some
> hardcoded comment strings where the actaul masks begin, and then
> insert text right below the examples. This is horrible. Can we nuke
> that convention, why are new entries at the top?
I think that convention comes from the fact that package.mask also acts
as a changelog for itself, and the newest entries are generally the
more "interesting" ones.
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list