Re: [gentoo-dev] apache and ~arch

[Paul de Vrieze]

On Sunday 13 March 2005 18:24, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Yes, I was one of the many people who emerged the new apache ebuild
> without paying sufficient attention to the mailing list post announcing
> the dramatic changes.  *Shrug*  It took me a day or so to get things
> fixed, but that was my own fault, and I have no complaints about the
> new config.

<cut>

> So, what should one do about a package that, in and of itself, is fully
> functional, but related packages have not yet been updated and package
> maintainers cannot be urged to move faster to fix the packages?  Well,
> nagging on bugs is usually the first step, followed by nagging on -dev
> so that people know that there is a problem.  If that doesn't work, the
> traditional method is to patch the related ebuilds oneself, add the
> patched ebuilds to package.mask in a nice big block along w/ the
> principal package, and start asking people to test.  That way, once it
> appears that the bugs are reasonably worked out the whole block can be
> unmasked at once, minimizing pain for our users who "can't read".
> Moreover, once this step is done it is perfectly reasonable to post a
> bug and a message to -dev saying "New foo system seems to be working,
> and we plan to unmask all at once in 30 days unless any maintainers of
> these packages [provide list] explicitly tells us not to do so."
>
It's actually worse. I had a new testing version of subversion in package 
mask, but it did not get unmasked with apache. Neither did I get notified 
(except by the general announcement) that the new apache stuff would be 
unmasked. I caught it in a couple of hours, but am wary of what happens 
when the new apache is marked stable as that would introduce similar 
problems.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@g.o
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net