-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 15:44:21 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 30/06/14 03:14 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote: > > > Setting up an overlay for this and poking a stick at a few > > developers to try it out could help as an intermediary test, to > > ensure that you don't break every ~arch user in the progress. > > Better than "all or nothing"... > > Or i can just use the same stick to poke them about the p.masked > version in the tree. :) > > All of this just means, to me, that as long as the packages indeed are > actively being pursued for testing, I think it's still fine to use > package.mask. However, if things aren't being actively tested (ie > they've been forgotten about) then probably whomever added the mask > should be pinged relentlessly about it until it's resolved one way or > another. At least, I would find it perfectly acceptable to being > pinged on any mask I've left rotting in the tree. +1 One could say that ensuring it is tested is part of the workflow; and then I don't mean your own testing, but inviting others to do so. - -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTtEguAAoJEPWZc8roOL/QKKoIAI0KlFu28ri4KB7gAWJAQXe/ cgvNYy7Gy5kwbl9pagCSP9NhBO0VZ4LNRZIMY0OqOhv/fs9pM2+tdKOV3c/f+8mo 3PvE2zW6+U0NUDBeYDmSdRoCVuFecuZiLk9y8gciGLIipLVZ9jaIwW2N5l/jvT69 KZFLLRgoFvLeXFvg05LUbZgKlMsvpi3DJh0HWG2l0CCuGAw+vNSnFqviPyFWnVCP mhZZuYh3Xwf9/yyrWwKHFY+JjlHD2aqCd1rO9q7Ght/Wbi1knzBt4PE+kgj7xTSo 7BVTEuskcAq4yU9wvmxUYKIyGGwnjmVD5L+fK+LcVnWp4A8zwQG6bk6opiSIFN0= =R2Cc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
