| 1 |
On 6/7/16 11:37 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 07 Jun 2016 15:56:16 +0100 |
| 3 |
> "M. J. Everitt" <m.j.everitt@×××.org> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> On 07/06/16 16:44, james wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> On 06/07/2016 09:25 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 7 |
>>>> Wouldn't removing it from repositories.xml have pretty much the same |
| 8 |
>>>> effect? |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
>>>> Also, i think we should make the unreviewed repo public then, so |
| 11 |
>>>> people can get the newest ebuilds. |
| 12 |
>>> |
| 13 |
>>> Perhaps a deprecation period of a year, with a gentoo wiki page that |
| 14 |
>>> lists the packages found @sunrise, is a good idea? |
| 15 |
>>> |
| 16 |
>>> |
| 17 |
>> A year is a very short time in software terms .. maybe 5 years ... !! |
| 18 |
>> But freezing it, with the intention of removing from repos.xml in 5 |
| 19 |
>> years time seems reasonable to me. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> I'm against keeping it in repos.xml for more than a month, considering |
| 22 |
> the current (huge) state of breakage it is in. Other repositories with |
| 23 |
> similar breakage were already removed. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
It should not be used as an overlay. It has not been updated for nearly |
| 27 |
a year and if its frozen as an archive then all the more reason. There |
| 28 |
should also be huge warnings in the README. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. |
| 32 |
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] |
| 33 |
E-Mail : blueness@g.o |
| 34 |
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA |
| 35 |
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA |
Archives