* [rfc] Deleting catalyst 3.x code (was Fwd: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Migrating man page to asciidoc?)
@ 2011-07-04 0:22 Sebastian Pipping
2011-07-04 0:32 ` Matt Turner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Pipping @ 2011-07-04 0:22 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-catalyst
Second try as a new thread:
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.
Best,
Sebastian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfc] Deleting catalyst 3.x code (was Fwd: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Migrating man page to asciidoc?)
2011-07-04 0:22 [rfc] Deleting catalyst 3.x code (was Fwd: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Migrating man page to asciidoc?) Sebastian Pipping
@ 2011-07-04 0:32 ` Matt Turner
2011-07-04 0:45 ` Sebastian Pipping
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Matt Turner @ 2011-07-04 0:32 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-catalyst
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Ideas on find out who is using 9999:
>
> - Removing 9999 ebuild from the tree and see who's complaining
I actually use the -9999 ebuild with EGIT_BRANCH="catalyst_2", so I'd
prefer not to do this.
I would probably just ask if anyone is using catalyst3 through a few
mediums. I suspect that no one is.
In order to make any sort of decisions, we should probably know what
the significant changes in catalyst-3 are to begin with.
Matt
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfc] Deleting catalyst 3.x code (was Fwd: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Migrating man page to asciidoc?)
2011-07-04 0:32 ` Matt Turner
@ 2011-07-04 0:45 ` Sebastian Pipping
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Pipping @ 2011-07-04 0:45 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-catalyst
On 07/04/2011 02:32 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Ideas on find out who is using 9999:
>>
>> - Removing 9999 ebuild from the tree and see who's complaining
>
> I actually use the -9999 ebuild with EGIT_BRANCH="catalyst_2", so I'd
> prefer not to do this.
To improve on that workaround please add a new live ebuild 2.9999.
Sebastian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-07-04 0:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-07-04 0:22 [rfc] Deleting catalyst 3.x code (was Fwd: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Migrating man page to asciidoc?) Sebastian Pipping
2011-07-04 0:32 ` Matt Turner
2011-07-04 0:45 ` Sebastian Pipping
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox