Stephen Bennett napsal(a): > On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:57:06 +0100 > Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Of course it does... Lots of people can't remove outdated broken cruft >> because $ebuild still depends on something since $arch has been >> slacking for months. Lots of people are forced to maintain outdated >> junk in this way, it's not like it's just sitting there doing nothing. > > Did you even read my mail? We're not asking people to maintain old > stuff, just to leave it there as is until a newer one can be tested and > keyworded.
Sure I did... Could you tell me why should we accumulate broken and vulnerable junk in the tree for years? (Outdated ebuild A depends on junky outdated ebuild B which depends on crappy, unsupported ebuilds C, D and E which... ) Either keyword it in a reasonable time or you'll lose the keyword, damn simple... Can't do it in X months? Sorry, too bad for your arch, the package is gone and users will rant (or they won't, and then you don't need the keywords in the first place). -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
