| 1 |
Carsten Lohrke <carlo@g.o> said: |
| 2 |
> On Thursday 30 March 2006 01:55, Mark Loeser wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Not directed specifically at you, but it seems a lot of people are |
| 4 |
> > masking stuff and removing it very quickly, and I'd really like to see |
| 5 |
> > everyone wait the 30 days to remove something from the tree. That way |
| 6 |
> > anyone using this package in some way will get the message from p.mask, |
| 7 |
> > and know what they should upgrade to. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > With that being said, is there any reason that the package should be |
| 10 |
> > removed so quickly? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Yes, there is. It's slowing down the process, getting into the flow. Waiting |
| 13 |
> 30 days is a lot of time. A regular user does not necessarily follow the |
| 14 |
> dev-gentoo mailing list and it doesn't matter for him, if the package is |
| 15 |
> masked or removed. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Because everyone is sitting in anticipation of the package being |
| 18 |
removed? Mask the package, and go about your life as if it was gone. |
| 19 |
Then in a month when you remember about it again, remove it. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
The difference is, if you mask the package, the user gets a nice error |
| 22 |
message explaining what is going on. If you just remove the package, |
| 23 |
then they just get an error that the package has disappeared on them. |
| 24 |
By your logic, we should do away with the entire masking process and |
| 25 |
just remove stuff when we like, and that would just lead to users filing |
| 26 |
lots of bugs asking where their package went. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Everyone used to wait the month, but lately it seems like no one can |
| 29 |
ignore the package for that long after putting it in p.mask. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86) |
| 33 |
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org |
| 34 |
mark AT halcy0n DOT com |
| 35 |
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ |
| 36 |
http://www.halcy0n.com |
Archives