Archives
Archives
| From: | Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] summary: proposed solutions to arches/stable problem | ||
| Date: | Wed, 23 Jun 2004 19:03:49 | ||
| Message-Id: | 1088017440.20431.5.camel@localhost | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] summary: proposed solutions to arches/stable problem by Chris Gianelloni |
||
| 1 | On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 12:08, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 | > I don't see why it would not be easy enough to comment the reasons an |
| 3 | > ebuild might not be marked stable. Another example that I can think of |
| 4 | > is the xorg-x11 ebuilds. You can see an obvious TODO list before it is |
| 5 | > considered stable. |
| 6 | |
| 7 | Which, by the way, is out of date. Now that you've so kindly reminded |
| 8 | me, I'm updating it. |
| 9 | -- |
| 10 | Donnie Berkholz |
| 11 | Gentoo Linux |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] summary: proposed solutions to arches/stable problem | Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o> |