| 1 |
Stephen Bennett napsal(a): |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:57:06 +0100 |
| 3 |
> Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> Of course it does... Lots of people can't remove outdated broken cruft |
| 6 |
>> because $ebuild still depends on something since $arch has been |
| 7 |
>> slacking for months. Lots of people are forced to maintain outdated |
| 8 |
>> junk in this way, it's not like it's just sitting there doing nothing. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Did you even read my mail? We're not asking people to maintain old |
| 11 |
> stuff, just to leave it there as is until a newer one can be tested and |
| 12 |
> keyworded. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Sure I did... Could you tell me why should we accumulate broken and |
| 15 |
vulnerable junk in the tree for years? (Outdated ebuild A depends on |
| 16 |
junky outdated ebuild B which depends on crappy, unsupported ebuilds C, |
| 17 |
D and E which... ) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Either keyword it in a reasonable time or you'll lose the keyword, damn |
| 20 |
simple... Can't do it in X months? Sorry, too bad for your arch, the |
| 21 |
package is gone and users will rant (or they won't, and then you don't |
| 22 |
need the keywords in the first place). |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Best regards, |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Jakub Moc |
| 29 |
mailto:jakub@g.o |
| 30 |
GPG signature: |
| 31 |
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E |
| 32 |
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
... still no signature ;) |
Archives