| 1 |
On 2011年07月08日 04:01, Michael Orlitzky wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 07/07/11 15:36, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> And what about gnome? Does that not impose a fantastic testing burden, |
| 5 |
>> alongside which gnome-mplayer is small in comparison? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Yes, but the value of one's time isn't relative. If you'll allow me to |
| 8 |
> make up the numbers, just because it takes a month of time to test Gnome |
| 9 |
> doesn't mean that the day it would take to test gnome-mplayer is any |
| 10 |
> less valuable. In those eight hours you can still drink the same number |
| 11 |
> of beers, read the same number of books, or -- hell, in this case -- fix |
| 12 |
> the same number of bugs in other packages. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
The time when you reply this message, you've already done that test |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
>> How about the devs relook at this and do it sanely. When the major |
| 19 |
>> consumer of gtk+ (gnome itself) has a stable gtk+-3 very in stable, |
| 20 |
>> then other packages follow suit, not before. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> I don't think anyone would disagree that this is nice to have; you just |
| 23 |
> have to find someone to do the work. Writing ebuilds is fun, setting up |
| 24 |
> test environments and recompiling all day is not. |
| 25 |
> |
Archives