1 |
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 13:49, Joshua Jackson wrote: |
2 |
> Mark Loeser <halcy0n <at> gentoo.org> writes: |
3 |
> > Donnie Berkholz <spyderous <at> gentoo.org> said: |
4 |
> > > Jason Stubbs wrote: |
5 |
> > > > The patch now has the debugging output and x11-base/xorg-x11 check |
6 |
> > > > removed. |
7 |
> > > |
8 |
> > > Excellent. Works perfectly. Since we're failing on them, perhaps we can |
9 |
> > > say "obsolete" instead of "deprecated"? |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > Can we put this back to being a warning? It makes things a pain for arch |
12 |
> > teams that are trying to mark a completely unrelated version of the |
13 |
> > package. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> I will have to agree that this change has made it a pain to mark anything |
16 |
> stable. I had 4 out of the 6 I did today bail out because of this. I took |
17 |
> the simple easy fix and removed the check to stabalize the packages I needed |
18 |
> to. I know we have people who want modular X yesterday, but causing trouble |
19 |
> for dev's going about business that doesn't involve the modular problems |
20 |
> directly is only going to cause resentment and frustration to all the teams |
21 |
> involved. |
22 |
|
23 |
Is there any need for the packages to go into stable without the X deps being |
24 |
fixed? Why not just open a bug for the package maintainer and mark it against |
25 |
whatever bug is requesting stabling of that package? Moving something to |
26 |
stable that you know is going to be broken within a relatively short |
27 |
timeframe seems like a very bad idea... |
28 |
|
29 |
-- |
30 |
Jason Stubbs |
31 |
-- |
32 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |