On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 02:47 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:44:22 -0800 > "Alec Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Uh... So where do the original problems come from? Are you saying > > > that packages mysteriously start breaking on their own because > > > no-one's maintaining them? > > > > Of course they do > > Ah, right. Because of the magical elf that lives in the CVS server > that mysteriously goes around breaking dependencies when no-one's > looking. > > Yes, a magical elf. Much more plausible than the theory that it's > actually developers screwing up by dropping keywords or best keyworded > version on a package's deps.
Actually, nobody ever said anything about things that magically break. It's more the things like ebuilds with bad code that can't really be changed without a revision bump, which would also require the arch team in question to ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING to make stable. Seriously, your thinly-veiled attempts at deflecting the conversation to something that supports your pithy points is laughable. The issue that was raised is that certain arch teams are incapable of keeping up with the minimal workload they already have and what should be done about it. We want the Council to do something about this issue. You can deny the issue all that you want or try to deflect conversation from the actual issue, but your opinion isn't very important to the much of the current developer pool, seeing as how it doesn't affect you in any way, having been thrown from the project, and all. Now, if you have something possibly constructive to add to this conversation, as a user, feel free, but don't pretend like you're still a member of the mips team. You're not. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
