Archives
Archives
| From: | Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask vs ~arch | ||
| Date: | Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:56:01 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20140630185521.37cbd2dd@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask vs ~arch by Rich Freeman |
||
| 1 | On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:40:59 -0400 |
| 2 | Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 | |
| 4 | > I'm perfectly fine with the suggestion of requiring a bug reference |
| 5 | > when masking for testing. I think that adds value. |
| 6 | |
| 7 | You don't mean a reference to a bug report that merely says "masked for |
| 8 | testing" or purports to be a "tracker" (but isn't), right? |
| 9 | |
| 10 | |
| 11 | jer |