On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 02:17 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Oh. Yeah. Because people with an attitude like yours think that the > correct way to fix a repoman message is to start nuking arch keywords, > ignoring what it does to the rest of the tree.
...for the architecture in question which is proving incapable of keeping up with the state of the tree as it is... Sorry, you fail. > > > This is especially true since you've been pretty much the main > > proponent for keeping things as they are with these slack arches. > > Perhaps because the people maintaining those archs have better things > to do that deal with the same silly ill-thought-out arguments every > three months. > > > I mean, if vapier can maintain arm/sh/s390, by himself, to a better > > degree than the mips *TEAM* can do, that should be an indication of a > > problem. > > That's an interesting assertion. Can you back it up? Sure. You can, too. Just look at bugs. If you think I'm taking the time to do it to justify my statements to YOU, you're sorely mistaken. Have a nice day, -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
