| 1 |
Dylan Carlson <absinthe@g.o> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> As a user, or anyone really, your expectations are a bit too high. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Well, I was assuming fixing those bugs involved only adding the arch |
| 6 |
to the KEYWORDS. But if the devs actually test the package (which |
| 7 |
they might not have ever used nor have an idea on how to test it |
| 8 |
without reading the docs), that's really a bit much to expect from |
| 9 |
volunteers. So you're right -- I'm in no position to demand anything |
| 10 |
at all. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> Let's take one of the bugs you filed, for instance -- |
| 13 |
> dev-util/darcs: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> ...which depends on virtual/ghc (not currently available), wxhaskell (not |
| 16 |
> currently available) which in turn depends on haddock (not currently |
| 17 |
> available). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Well, bugs are filed for all of them. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> You're just in luck that I've been using darcs for the past week or so, and |
| 22 |
> if I give it one more pass tonight, I will make those packages available. |
| 23 |
> And as Ciaran pointed out, we don't blindly keyword packages just because |
| 24 |
> they manage to compile. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Thanks. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Gabriel. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives