| 1 |
I'd like to chime in if I may. I've found "VERIFIED" to be needless. |
| 2 |
Especially in cases where I have logs or whatnot, having to prove the bug |
| 3 |
is there is tedious. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Shouldn't the existence of the report be evidence enough? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> |
| 10 |
> wrote: |
| 11 |
> > On 06/17/2016 07:05 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: |
| 12 |
> >> |
| 13 |
> >> Then everyone PLEASE stop referring to the Gentoo ebuild tree as |
| 14 |
> >> portage. Reserve portage for the upstream PACKAGE MANAGER. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > indeed |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Agree, though this wasn't the sense I meant it in (in case there was |
| 20 |
> any confusion). |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> 1. There is the Gentoo Repo (which I always try to describe using those |
| 23 |
> words). |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> 2. Then there is the sys-apps/portage package in the Gentoo repo. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> 3. And then there is the portage upstream that occasionally makes |
| 28 |
> releases that end up as #2. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> It is between 2-3 that we need to distinguish here. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> I agree with the suggestion that context is sufficient already. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> -- |
| 35 |
> Rich |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> |
Archives