Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jason Wever <weeve@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unmasking modular X
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 05:25:35
Message-Id: 20060124222254.1a481008@enterprise.weeve.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unmasking modular X by Donnie Berkholz
1 On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:35:07 -0800
2 Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > But if there are archs that would rather not move to modular X, that's
5 > their prerogative. The way I look at it is, sometimes change comes at
6 > a price. I really hope they aren't any archs I use though, because I
7 > take a certain amount of pride in making the best and newest X
8 > available. When people remask it, it's like they're directly battling
9 > against the whole reason I'm involved in Gentoo.
10
11 As an arch team, SPARC would like to move to modular X. However if
12 packages are broken by this unmasking, it *will* be masked on SPARC
13 until such a time that this is fixed. Also a complaint will be filed
14 with developer relations and QA as this blatantly and knowingly defies
15 the policies regarding keywording that were put in place to
16 intentionally prohibit this kind of behavior.
17
18 I'm not trying to be a party pooper here, but breaking the portage tree
19 should never be an acceptable answer.
20
21 Cheers,
22 --
23 Jason Wever
24 Gentoo/Sparc Team Co-Lead

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Unmasking modular X Joshua Baergen <joshuabaergen@g.o>