On Sun, 3 Feb 2013 18:51:45 +0100 Alex Schuster <wo...@wonkology.org> wrote:
> Alan McKinnon writes: > > - news item > > There is one, from 2013-01-23, ending with 'Apologies if this news > came too late for you.' > > Okay, if that one came a little earlier, I would have been fine. I would have too. IMO, given the difficulties of putting in automagic checks and/or failures that would work for everyone, news items are the best way to handle info like this. I'm a bit concerned that there wasn't one earlier for udev-197-r*. AFAICT from the changelog, udev-197.ebuild hit the tree on 9 January, and the stabilization bug* for a later revision was filed on 16 January. The stabilization request makes it clear devs should not rush and should report any further issues they run across, yet udev-197-r3 was stabilized just a few days later, at which point stable users started hitting the issues. I'm not clear on why udev-197-r* needed stabilization without having ~arch keywords for a period. I rely on the kindness of ~arch testers who are willing to encounter the issues I later read about in a news item before an ebuild is stabilized. * https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=452556
