| 1 |
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 03/06/14 15:08, Tom Wijsman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 07:35:42 -0400 |
| 4 |
>> Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>> This probably could have used a news item, as the change impacts both |
| 7 |
>>> stable and ~arch users. |
| 8 |
>> Are we going to write a news item every time systemd acquires a new |
| 9 |
>> mandatory relationship with a reverse dependency? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> IMHO, not every singular dependency change (even blocker) needs one. |
| 12 |
> For those failing to read `eix upower` or `emerge -C upower` or masking |
| 13 |
> systemd, or number of other ways the blocker can be solved, the answer |
| 14 |
> is in Gentoo news letter, forums, first hits in Google, /topic of #gentoo at |
| 15 |
> Freenode, MLs, pretty much everywhere. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The whole point of news is to tell people about an action they need to |
| 18 |
take before they have to take it. The output of portage doesn't |
| 19 |
really tell you what is going on. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
The article in GMN doesn't provide clear instructions on what needs to |
| 22 |
be done, and refers to 0.99.0 when the issue impacts 0.9.23 as well. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> But news item has been planned all along for when UPower 0.99.0 goes |
| 26 |
> stable, propably |
| 27 |
> GNOME 3.12 and some 0.99.0 consumers, when there are enough steps to |
| 28 |
> accumulate as news worthy. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
This has already hit stable. The dependency on systemd is present in |
| 31 |
sys-power/upower-0.9.23-r3, which was just stablized. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Rich |
Archives