From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QdW6C-0000Vc-Ap for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 03 Jul 2011 23:29:12 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 886D021C112; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 23:28:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay02.ispgateway.de (smtprelay02.ispgateway.de [80.67.31.25]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DEA921C112 for ; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 23:28:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [85.179.21.154] (helo=[192.168.1.2]) by smtprelay02.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1QdW5l-0007Gc-5E for gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 01:28:45 +0200 Message-ID: <4E10FB27.3080608@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 01:28:39 +0200 From: Sebastian Pipping User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110628 Thunderbird/3.1.11 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Migrating man page to asciidoc? References: <20110626024929.GA6506@linux1> <4E06A41E.6000705@gentoo.org> <20110626033613.GA6577@linux1> <4E06AC3D.4000901@gentoo.org> <20110626043329.GA6710@linux1> <4E06BC27.3020808@gentoo.org> <20110626173348.GA8371@linux1> <20110626175504.4199.qmail@stuge.se> <4E07C031.1030004@gentoo.org> <20110627000035.10174.qmail@stuge.se> <4E07CF74.5020900@gentoo.org> <4E07E039.1000308@gentoo.org> <4E07FFCC.4090109@gentoo.org> <4E08A7E0.3090706@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4E08A7E0.3090706@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Df-Sender: sping-gentoo@binera.de X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: e8f38e83b3a651e854f0a8d75f77f7ba On 06/27/2011 05:55 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > On 06/27/2011 05:58 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: >> We use 2.0.6.916 on official releng releases. >> I tried 9999 on my private tests because [..] > > To me that leaves the question who uses 9999 for serious stuff at all. > In case it's no one (which we should find out) we could trash that > branch and fully concentrate on calalyst_2. > > I guess that sounds a bit radical at first. It doesn't have to be a > quick decision. Also, version control allows us to bring it back if needed. > > Ideas on find out who is using 9999: > > - Removing 9999 ebuild from the tree and see who's complaining > > - Resetting branch master to nothing but a README announcing > the possible death of that thread and a request to join > this mailing list and speak up about it if there is need. > > - Asking on one/some/all of gentoo-dev, gentoo-user, gentoo forums, > planet gentoo. > > After such action I imagine a time window of 2 to 4 weeks to give people > a chance to react. > > What do you think? > > >> I can confirm that the build with the master branch fails as it doesn't >> seem able to find the spec files or doesn't accept them - the official >> ones we use to build weekly releases. > > That seems to further decrease the chance that someone is using 9999 for > real to me. One week has passed by. Anyone? Sebastian