From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1FDB9g-0004B7-NK for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 01:57:01 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k1Q1ug8f008021; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 01:56:42 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k1Q1ug3X009218 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 01:56:42 GMT Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=home.wh0rd.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1FDB9N-0007np-MR for gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 01:56:41 +0000 Received: (qmail 29867 invoked from network); 25 Feb 2006 20:54:06 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2) by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 25 Feb 2006 20:54:06 -0500 From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-qa] Live CVS ebuilds in the tree Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:56:51 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060225235827.GC15211@aerie.halcy0n.com> In-Reply-To: <20060225235827.GC15211@aerie.halcy0n.com> GEOMAN: IS A RETARD Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-qa@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200602252056.51214.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 25adc6dc-0faa-4b6b-9c7f-5f4c33346f88 X-Archives-Hash: e40852e9a6e3321d7bf26e35ff368bce On Saturday 25 February 2006 18:58, Mark Loeser wrote: > So, I am wondering how everyone feels about live CVS ebuilds in the > tree. I'd prefer that everyone did CVS snapshots, but I know that won't > happen overnight. The real problem that I have is live CVS ebuilds that > are not in package.mask. The handbook seems to encourage marking them > ~arch and not place them in package.mask, so I am curious how others > feel about it before bringing this up on gentoo-dev@. i dont think a hard rule will ever be appropriate -mike -- gentoo-qa@gentoo.org mailing list