| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 5 |
> So, only this reply. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> May I conclude that nobody objects to the above? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Ulrich |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Wearing only my perl team hat, it would seem to lowly me that if a |
| 12 |
virtual points to packages foo and bar, and both foo and bar were tested |
| 13 |
and marked stable by the arch's previously, that its silly to then wait |
| 14 |
for them to mark the virtual stable as well, since at least in my |
| 15 |
perception the only function of that virtual is to say use one of these |
| 16 |
packages - which have already been marked stable. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
/me hopes some arch brains step in, like weeve in particular, who is |
| 19 |
usually far more eloquent at defending an arch's position |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
- -- |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
- -----o()o---------------------------------------------- |
| 24 |
Michael Cummings | #gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl |
| 25 |
Gentoo Perl Dev | on irc.freenode.net |
| 26 |
Gentoo/SPARC |
| 27 |
Gentoo/AMD64 |
| 28 |
GPG: 0543 6FA3 5F82 3A76 3BF7 8323 AB5C ED4E 9E7F 4E2E |
| 29 |
- -----o()o---------------------------------------------- |
| 30 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 31 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (GNU/Linux) |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
iD8DBQFGXpVDq1ztTp5/Ti4RAn3fAJ93fLU/G2QOB5p6jeGQst4lnyXEWgCfeuPg |
| 34 |
kQDUKObUWKYcIWndm6zGm6U= |
| 35 |
=beGq |
| 36 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives