| 1 |
Alec Warner wrote: |
| 2 |
> On the topic of old ebuilds; situations may arise where a particular |
| 3 |
> maintainer is trying to clean out a version of a package but finds |
| 4 |
> that $arch doesn't have anything newer stable and thus can't do any |
| 5 |
> sort of cleanup for fear of breaking $arch. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> You will probably again state that maintainer should just leave the |
| 8 |
> older versions around. I will state that at least as a maintainer I'm |
| 9 |
> willing to do so for only a limited period of time. Otherwise it |
| 10 |
> becomes an annoyance when trying to clean up after packages to have |
| 11 |
> ebuilds from three or four minor versions ago lying around. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Now this is the exact situation that I'm wondering about. What's the |
| 14 |
best thing to do? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
The only thing I can come up with is, if there's an old ebuild that I |
| 17 |
won't help support / maintain, but it's the latest stable for some arch, |
| 18 |
then remove all the other arch keywords except that one. At least that |
| 19 |
way, I won't have to worry about people from arches who *are* up to date |
| 20 |
bugging me about it. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I'm not sure that's the best solution though. I can see the reasoning |
| 23 |
behind "there's a newer stable version anyway, so they shouldn't use the |
| 24 |
old one", but really ... it can get annoying having some "stable |
| 25 |
request" bugs open for a very long time. If someone wants to donate me |
| 26 |
more hardware, I'll get to working on those. :) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Steve |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives