| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA512 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 12/17/2011 09:34 AM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: |
| 5 |
> 2011/12/16 Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o>: |
| 6 |
>> On 12/12/2011 05:44 PM, Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> scarabeus 11/12/12 17:44:48 |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>>> Modified: ChangeLog Added: |
| 10 |
>>> libreoffice-3.4.99.1.ebuild Removed: libreoffice-3.5.0.0.ebuild |
| 11 |
>>> Log: Remove miss-named beta0. Add beta1 with better name |
| 12 |
>>> (presented as downgrade). |
| 13 |
>>> |
| 14 |
>>> (Portage version: 2.2.0_alpha80/cvs/Linux x86_64, RepoMan |
| 15 |
>>> options: --force) |
| 16 |
>>> |
| 17 |
>>> Revision Changes Path 1.216 |
| 18 |
>>> app-office/libreoffice/ChangeLog |
| 19 |
>>> |
| 20 |
>> I know it is a bit late but do you think that commit made sense |
| 21 |
>> at that time? It is not the best user experience we can provide |
| 22 |
>> when beta releases appear as downgrades. FWIW beta releases |
| 23 |
>> should remain masked to avoid useless compilations to slow |
| 24 |
>> machines instead of digging through Changelogs to see what |
| 25 |
>> happened. Are the beta releases of libreoffice so critical that |
| 26 |
>> force you to keep them in the ~testing tree? |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
> They should be stable enough plus it helps a lot to catch all the |
| 29 |
> bugs. Most of those Gentooers reported are being fixed and I think |
| 30 |
> it is better to test it during the beta cycle rather than start |
| 31 |
> messing with it after final release. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> So if you don't want those ebuild in main tree just tell me so and |
| 34 |
> I can add only the releases (but then I won't care about the bugs |
| 35 |
> much as I do this fixes as part of the upstream QA and don't use |
| 36 |
> Gentoo [no worries I compile/runtime test it in the dev tinderbox |
| 37 |
> that has gentoo], so at the point of release I should be focusing |
| 38 |
> on master branch again). |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> Tom |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
You misunderstood me. I don't object to beta ebuilds but I wonder if |
| 43 |
testing users want to have them by default. Maybe they should be |
| 44 |
masked by default and whoever wants the shiny stuff can always unmask |
| 45 |
them. Anyway not a big deal. I guess I belong to the minority of |
| 46 |
people who do own a single core PC in 2011 :) |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
- -- |
| 49 |
Regards, |
| 50 |
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 |
| 51 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 52 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJO7GcxAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCd3oQAMR8gUxPPu+tnPWkOmU5ZedK |
| 55 |
B7aCy09P2ecV/BvxDBf1wQOWDb19tpfXT15Rm486+pxkDovP0lhr8hbNklfHXbjE |
| 56 |
fB+2JYvEb5qf/zNePCNRc6LC/KaDurIx+z4RzFBOquoZbJM5Z6c8ya+w2q98YmtD |
| 57 |
DsB5y1jpq5Fs2eVNjDvmuzDjR0MoMPP1oE9Y0kU4D5ahpH03IdPbyCv/AjR/M3lb |
| 58 |
MRezGuRI7EQmrnBNdqZIJpUPHaCioxsyvIeVpw9gkprdQPC4olX8ASd90En41kA6 |
| 59 |
pnxK1+u1WYJKWJyCZrGROIlws8dBa/mKHn+E+SU10j4kLGIi6dYQGOghPC8g+yop |
| 60 |
3E4kgDlJZnXTIpnCszrdkgoqWlDNzmToV6c0D6hvc9itG2aE8vwiSKXHQMp1Lxf7 |
| 61 |
RGF1/gxyojB9ExUhCwWK7jFBPqhrYb88CpU5fvLRGR8VQ5zq1pM3F5yNoPg4qYdD |
| 62 |
U7tUdwm6UPNc9p3QfLSW93FSV4MAEzXhOuj0Kmt9AMr0n+boKyzycm44wm1R31NM |
| 63 |
hXoX7bhxP4r2UPRXUJBO+3FGdcxrH4YkcZ3A5yXEV/LwkgtSKsJRzyA5/VQFZCkw |
| 64 |
Tt5wvXqRrjW51fVfeY3SU8q/Y0W1pu46Dd1C3Vc3jR1xW8uUegVVJNizmOdOC70y |
| 65 |
O7p/tIdyadV9aOjsSKUs |
| 66 |
=oIMb |
| 67 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives