| 1 |
Dnia 2015-04-06, o godz. 06:29:55 |
| 2 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 3:59 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > And so far, nobody but me and Patrick basically cared about dependency |
| 7 |
> > graph not being broken. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Don't assume discussion of alternatives is equivalent to not caring. |
| 11 |
> The reasons for not breaking the depgraph were fairly well articulated |
| 12 |
> - it doesn't really add much to repeat them. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Personally I'm leaning more towards making the entire arches |
| 15 |
> non-stable, but I'd still prefer to have a policy that can be applied |
| 16 |
> across all archs, and it doesn't make sense to make all archs |
| 17 |
> non-stable. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Developing a policy that intentionally makes it impossible to work |
| 20 |
on Gentoo... |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Best regards, |
| 24 |
Michał Górny |
Archives