| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 08/08/14 05:33 PM, Kent Fredric wrote: |
| 5 |
> [ Snip! ] - Somebody has to implement this technology - That |
| 6 |
> requires time and effort - People have to be convinced of its |
| 7 |
> value - Integration must happen at some level somehow somewhere in |
| 8 |
> the portage toolchain(s) - People must opt in to this technology in |
| 9 |
> order for the reports to happen - And only then can this start to |
| 10 |
> deliver meaningful results. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
*AND* (just to tie this back) it's unlikely that this is going to |
| 14 |
actually help the original issue posted, ie, reducing the amount of |
| 15 |
dependency updates being done "unnecessarily" on a system, or making |
| 16 |
blind/automated system updates (of the type mentioned in the thread) |
| 17 |
less susceptible to system breakage. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 21 |
Version: GnuPG v2 |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAlPlQ58ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPAXawEAplg4MCOXTmY+MxJ4FpCYLnJ8 |
| 24 |
j/ETs84sy7MreBlWHaEA/jH8dEyJlQ8QAnJDftxmgiySwogdBweYQgaL6gPkxJTJ |
| 25 |
=Unnd |
| 26 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives