On Sat, 21 Apr 2012, Tomasz Pala wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 23:54:25 +0300, Caleb Maclennan wrote: > > > Artur ... I'm still not clear on what you GAIN by using HEAD instead > > of DEVEL? In spite of the name, isn't HEAD basically functioning as > > th-stable (plus some mess)? > > I assume he gains only one thing - he can commit what he wants to have > and made everyone else fixing related stuff. Such 'solution' was the > right of release manager so far.
Please stop playing stupid. What related stuff? We are talking about *gimp* here, a bitmap graphics *program*, not a critical lib, not even _a_ lib, there is only just a few plugins for it. poldek:/all-avail> what-requires libgimp*-2.0.so.0()(64bit) 11 package(s) found: gimp-2.6.12-3.x86_64 gimp-aa-2.6.12-3.x86_64 gimp-libs-2.6.12-3.x86_64 gimp-plugin-dds-2.0.7-1.x86_64 gimp-plugin-gtkam-0.1.17-2.x86_64 gimp-plugin-gutenprint-5.2.7-5.x86_64 gimp-plugin-lqr-0.6.1-1.x86_64 gimp-plugin-ufraw-0.18-4.x86_64 gimp-svg-2.6.12-3.x86_64 sane-frontends-1.0.14-1.x86_64 xsane-0.998-5.x86_64 I don't see a problem with 2.8rc1 on HEAD, especially when gimp.org officially stated EOL on 2.6 line. -- Jan Rękorajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | http://www.pld-linux.org/ baggins<at>mimuw.edu.pl baggins<at>pld-linux.org _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en