| 1 |
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 02:17 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> Oh. Yeah. Because people with an attitude like yours think that the |
| 3 |
> correct way to fix a repoman message is to start nuking arch keywords, |
| 4 |
> ignoring what it does to the rest of the tree. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
...for the architecture in question which is proving incapable of |
| 7 |
keeping up with the state of the tree as it is... |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Sorry, you fail. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> > This is especially true since you've been pretty much the main |
| 13 |
> > proponent for keeping things as they are with these slack arches. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Perhaps because the people maintaining those archs have better things |
| 16 |
> to do that deal with the same silly ill-thought-out arguments every |
| 17 |
> three months. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> > I mean, if vapier can maintain arm/sh/s390, by himself, to a better |
| 20 |
> > degree than the mips *TEAM* can do, that should be an indication of a |
| 21 |
> > problem. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> That's an interesting assertion. Can you back it up? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Sure. You can, too. Just look at bugs. If you think I'm taking the |
| 26 |
time to do it to justify my statements to YOU, you're sorely mistaken. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Have a nice day, |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 32 |
Release Engineering Strategic Lead |
| 33 |
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams |
| 34 |
Games Developer |
Archives