I recently ran into a similar issue regarding font ebuilds using LINGUAS
to select fonts to install (see acroread-asianfonts). I personally think
this is not the way to go, since LINGUAS is about language, not script,
support. Any comments on that issue ?
- foser
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 12:00 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> So you can create projects by creating a directory in
> gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en, you don't have to announce it (but it's
> polite to do so), and it may well conflict with other projects, that's okay.
>
> You can't blame them for followin
On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 16:05 +0200, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> > 2. [...] Therefore I do not believe that QA for a tree that is as
> > extensive as Sunrise done by a few 'official' developers amounts to
> > much real world quality.
>
> I would expect that over time, the Sunrise developers will learn m
Hello dear followers,
tonight after a some deliberation I have decided to step down as gnome
lead in favor of AllanonJL. As far as I am concerned AllanonJL has been
the acting lead for quite a while now, while I was too busy to devote
much time to Gentoo and as such it was the only logical next st
Hello,
since I've not really been involved in the whole Sunrise discussion I'd
like to give my view in a condensed form, instead of spreading it out
over 20 replies in the ongoing discussion. Also I hope to summarize the
main points a bit, but I know this mail is far from objective and as
such not
othing to do with
Gentoo and makes this part of the several third-party Gentoo ebuild
sites around. Good luck with that, but don't try to put a Gentoo
stamp-of-approval on it.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
weird errors, the continuous suspicion devs need
to have on reported errors. Keep that stuff separated, don't mingle it
with Gentoo.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
who came up with that name ? cheap
asian poetry attempt) doesn't change that by adding it to an 'official'
overlay.
Instead of tackling the real problem -the lack of maintainers to deal
with all requests- 'sunrise' is trying to create a backdoor for
unreliable maintained stuff to enter the tree.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ction I'll make the update needed, create metadata, make
> repoman happy.
Go right ahead.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
e policy concerning metadata makes no difference between
new/(un)maintained. It just says that every package should have one. So
if you come across a pack that doesn't and you touch it, you need to fix
that.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ges that do not have it, that has
not been done here. Adding 'maintainer-needed' (or 'no-herd') as a way
out is not sufficient and was never intended policy when metadata/herds
got introduced.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ld let go of that mindset. I think that if we come across cases
like this the goal should be to clear up the confusion. Either find a
maintainer or clean it out. That way eventually 'hundreds' becomes
'dozens' of unmaintained packages and maybe some day even less, it's a
gradual process.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
s ? That just doesn't
cut it, errors made in the past are no reason to make them again in the
future.
> feel free to mask
> and remove the hundreds of other packages that have no maintainer
So now we do have your blessing ? is then up for removal as of this
moment.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
the maintainer. And there is still the outstanding
issue that it is unmaintained in Gentoo, are you going to fix that or
not ? Otherwise it should be masked and removed.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
is
exactly why we get complaints about a stale tree.
I still say it should be removed in 30 days.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
proper course of action is making upstream aware of how they should
do libtool versioning. Adding workarounds like preserve_old_lib* should
only be a temporary measure.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
g some of your reactions on this thread.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ost anything here, it's credibility.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
had understood the Ubuntu contract you
would've never dropped this 'constitution' on -dev like this, especially
not at this time (you know what I mean).
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
the impossible, if you
come from Debian the Gentoo cycle seems perfect, but as soon people are
used to Gentoo the complaining starts anew. Get a grip and try to help
out in constructive ways.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
d to find a trail of bugs and tree garbage leading away from it. Get
rid of it, keep it clean.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
commercial business.
I don't think gtk 1 will leave the tree soon, but at least we can try to
make it unneeded on most users systems.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
waiting 30 days either. It's just that
most removals right now give a 1-2 week period react time, I just kept
to that.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Hey,
just added a mask for media-gfx/sodipodi. It has been forked into
inkscape and sodipodi development subsequently has stagnated. I intend
to remove sodipodi in about 7 days.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
t
tasks/DEs and either let loginmanagers choose on startup or users choose
on install.
I don't know what the future plans are of KDE regarding it's slotting,
but if it intends to use syswide (fdo) specs like mime/icons the install
alternate root is going to be the main hurdle to tackle.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
he RH approach of using xinitrc.d as a place to unify startup
scripts is a workable solution. I'd like the X11 teams input on this
however, since the X11 /etc layout and history behind it is largely
unknown to me.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
entry is needed for these 2.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Sat, 2005-06-11 at 14:46 -0400, Aron Griffis wrote:
> foser wrote: [Sat Jun 11 2005, 04:15:22AM EDT]
> > Arch keywords are concepts and as such may not primarily be dealt as
> > a an alphabetical list but as words in a sentence, there is no abc
> > order in sentences.
&
On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 11:15 +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> Wouldn't this be a good time to implement actual dependency ranges in
> portage. Btw. I normally use the following hack that portage might
> actually be made to understand:
>
> DEPEND="
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally sig
reate functions to do things portage really should do ? Wouldn't
pushing the portage team to finally implement a major feature like
depranges be a better idea ?
The gnome team has been dealing with these things forever, but we have a
preference for a global solution instead of inventing
e self defined not uniform policy. There was no need for policy or
regulation until some people set their own rules to play by, I really
don't understand why that move gets defended by anyone.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
might prove to be
effective in having everyone who deals with keywords actually really
check all keywords and not depend on assumptions, which both 'error'
cases you mention seem to be caused by.
Anyway, my feud is with the inconsistency within packages and how it got
introduced, not with whate
it.
As the threadstarter indicated, this was done without discussing it and
in the knowledge that there was no agreement on this issue. As said
before, the fact that something gets done some way, doesn't mean it's
right to do it that way.
> foser--
In the response to that particular
tent
within packages, it was an utterly pointless exercise in creating more
traffic on the servers.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
red in the metadata, if there
> is a need for.
Maintainer's arch could be ebuild/slot specific. I'm not yet convinced
metadata is the right place.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
lf to adopt this as policy.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ware of it's state.
Then if the maintainer still remains unresponsive there is sufficient
reason for the arch to act on their own.
In short, arches have to be able to strongly defend their actions if
they are to interfere with the maintainers responsibilities.
- foser
signature.asc
Descrip
ectory.
The current set-up isn't user-browseable anyway and hasn't been for a
long time. I don't think the focus should be on correcting that in the
tree, the user tools should be improved really.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
istakes from time to time.
1 strike, you are out.
- foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
39 matches
Mail list logo
