| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:21:20 +0200
|
| 5 |
Alexander Berntsen <bernalex@g.o> wrote:
|
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> On 30/05/14 19:18, Tom Wijsman wrote: |
| 8 |
> > Well, this thread's problem is not severe at all; thus, no need to |
| 9 |
> > mask. |
| 10 |
> I disagree. I'm with ssuominen. Do with that information what you |
| 11 |
> will... |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
One can disagree about that, even claim a need for masking; that still
|
| 14 |
doesn't mean one can ignore the maintainers and mask their package.
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
It's not *that* severe for there to be *such* mask; anyway, the commit
|
| 17 |
watches have been set up by some of those that would be affected, which
|
| 18 |
includes parties like releng and infra that both rely on this package.
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
If this were really severe, a ton of parties (users, dev, releng,
|
| 21 |
infra, ...) would've complained about this; but in my participation
|
| 22 |
everywhere, this comes over like a single once in a lifetime sea wave.
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
- --
|
| 25 |
With kind regards,
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
|
| 28 |
Gentoo Developer
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
E-mail address : TomWij@g.o
|
| 31 |
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D
|
| 32 |
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
|
| 33 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
| 34 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTiMrIAAoJEPWZc8roOL/QI9QH/jCt1y4/elM0VUvvJhu8KFXB
|
| 37 |
uQxvAHwArsEAf1PAjheRHKuEw+JlB8rSRRxz6T//M7I3MClpQ7q6teVuWy8HrChe
|
| 38 |
xI6hUF2QROZWzXYpf46c6fvqE6z6sJtI9AM6vzUCJdjpGhmQyDYBQFk9oYR+OCkb
|
| 39 |
6ZJM/SMURWcKxmkl0SgoMmDFSQVxTX/Lx3mpgAlfu1axyarJEGxODCF+kGbppKoB
|
| 40 |
xlulodqyvQJmoZyVIqmXf5Tv7acmSRkGfUmq3vaPHA/Y+7OH/Z1sp+8k0uzn7Sgw
|
| 41 |
ipZdsm93SvBCvfntFWXjk+uNI0z7i6R0vFuRJMmn02bLSEb2koBx3EbNPfBm/jU=
|
| 42 |
=aCvB
|
| 43 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives