1 |
On Tuesday 13 August 2002 18:28, Stuart Jansen wrote: |
2 |
> That said, let me say that as a user I've been very frustrated by the |
3 |
> handling of this change. I subscribe to the lists for the very purpose |
4 |
> of being informed of these changes. Unfortunately, the ebuilds started |
5 |
> to change more than four days before the announcement was sent out. It |
6 |
> seems to me this is the opposite of what should have happened. |
7 |
> |
8 |
|
9 |
Hi Stuart, yes valid complaints, but we also did plead for help testing builds |
10 |
at the end of July. I probably should have been more vocal before unmaksing. |
11 |
I am the guilty party that unmasked the new portage, as it was a necessity. |
12 |
The older release with no keywords had some problems and this was sadly |
13 |
holding back many other things that needed fixing. Given the poor (read |
14 |
ZERO) response from the lists and the fact that a large number of packages |
15 |
were keyworded, it was released. Sorry, was a necessary evil :( |
16 |
|
17 |
> Now that that's off my chest, I'll see if I have some time to build and |
18 |
> test this evening. Thanks again for making such a wonderful distro |
19 |
> available on ppc. |
20 |
|
21 |
Thanks :) And any help testing would be very much appreciated by all. The |
22 |
sheer volume of new and updated ebuilds in portage daily can be staggering |
23 |
and I believe we should be pushing hard for quality over quantity in the ppc |
24 |
port. I would rather see it take a tiny bit longer to get a new build to ppc |
25 |
users than to have a whole lot of people install something that doesn't work |
26 |
for them and/or potentially breaks their system :( |
27 |
|
28 |
Gerk |