Am 15.02.2013 01:19, schrieb Diego Elio Pettenò:
On 15/02/2013 01:15, Rich Freeman wrote:
How? We don't support overlays in the main tree. I could see a
package maintainer being nice if pinged by an overlay maintainer and
delaying some change for a short time to let an overlay be updated,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 15/02/13 01:19, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
The problem is when you have to triple-check that the user hasn't
enabled some random fucked up overlay and you have to guess whether
that might be the cause of the problem.
Yes. It's difficult to
On 15 February 2013 00:19, Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
On 15/02/2013 01:15, Rich Freeman wrote:
How? We don't support overlays in the main tree. I could see a
package maintainer being nice if pinged by an overlay maintainer and
delaying some change for a short time to
2013/2/14 Agostino Sarubbo a...@gentoo.org:
Probably we don't need to see maintainer-wanted stuff..
Oh but we need to see them, quite few of those can be closed as
invalid because the upstream is long ago dead.
Tom
On 14 February 2013 19:26, Tomáš Chvátal tomas.chva...@gmail.com wrote:
Dne Čt 14. února 2013 18:34:10, Markos Chandras napsal(a):
Why not 2011 and 2012 as well?
Feel free to add more, its on qa-scripts git repository.
Ok I was just wondering if there was a reason you did not add them
along
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
On 15/02/2013 01:15, Rich Freeman wrote:
How? We don't support overlays in the main tree. I could see a
package maintainer being nice if pinged by an overlay maintainer and
delaying some change for a short time
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 1:41 AM, Tomáš Chvátal tomas.chva...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/2/14 Agostino Sarubbo a...@gentoo.org:
Probably we don't need to see maintainer-wanted stuff..
Oh but we need to see them, quite few of those can be closed as
invalid because the upstream is long ago dead.
2013/2/15 Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org:
I was under the impression we just left those bugs open forever...are
we closing them now?
Why should we keep them opened forever. They should be closed when the
package is no longer provided anywhere or obsoleted by something else.
2013/2/15 Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org:
On 14 February 2013 19:26, Tomáš Chvátal tomas.chva...@gmail.com wrote:
Dne Čt 14. února 2013 18:34:10, Markos Chandras napsal(a):
Why not 2011 and 2012 as well?
Feel free to add more, its on qa-scripts git repository.
Ok I was just wondering
In case you missed it and work in Europe with Python,
http://pyfound.blogspot.fr/2013/02/python-trademark-at-risk-in-europe-we.html
--
Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org
Gentoo
Le jeudi 14 février 2013 à 19:19 +0100, Tomáš Chvátal a écrit :
Hi,
I added the bug queries to http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/ based by year of
last
being touched.
Take look, try to close the oldest ones/invalid ones and so on.
I think it is lame we have bugs last touched in 2k5 :-P
2013/2/15 Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org:
On another note, I just saw a report for EAPI per eclass which is super
nice but unfortunately, EAPI=5 is listed but actually unsupported by the
result of the scan :)
This can't be done better right now, as we use pkgcore to gather these
stats
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Tomáš Chvátal tomas.chva...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it is lame we have bugs last touched in 2k5 :-P
Yeah, very useful. I went through most of the Python bugs and cleaned some up.
It looks like there's a *lot* of maintainer-wanted bugs that are very
old. I
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 09:39:34AM +, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 15 February 2013 00:19, Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
The problem is when you have to triple-check that the user hasn't
enabled some random fucked up overlay and you have to guess whether that
might be
On 15/02/2013 11:33, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
Yes. It's difficult to govern freedom.
Freedom is overrated, especially by those who use such sound bites.
Let me guess, you use CFLAGS=-O3 -funroll-loops? I sure hope not.
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu —
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 15/02/13 13:58, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
Freedom is overrated, especially by those who use such sound
bites.
Whilst you do get to decide how and if you choose to value my freedom,
you most certainly do *not* get to decide how I should rate it.
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 01:48:34PM +0100, Cyprien Nicolas wrote:
Not really, this works when the bug is opened against a given package
from an overlay. Diego's raised issue is about some *DEPEND installed
from an overlay, but the failing package is from the tree.
emerge --info will not report
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 15/02/13 08:10 AM, Cyprien Nicolas wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 01:48:34PM +0100, Cyprien Nicolas wrote:
Not really, this works when the bug is opened against a given
package from an overlay. Diego's raised issue is about some
*DEPEND
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
I expect to see the full result one would have to emerge -epv
[package] , at least that will report the repos for all *DEPENDs
(although it is a bit overkill to have users submit that in the
general case)
There are
On 15/02/2013 10:44, Alec Warner wrote:
I empathize, but I'm not really sure it is a blocker for this effort.
Developers already have to evaluate whether the bug the user filed is
legitimate; I don't think this makes that significantly more
difficult. As stated. spotting overlay usage is
On 15 February 2013 22:34, Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
(But I would still argue that spotting overlay usage is not always as
simple; at least in one case I got somebody who was trying to hide their
use of proaudio.)
Users editing the output of emerge --info and hiding they
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/14/2013 05:39 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 15/02/13 00:27, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina wrote:
Remove firmware from users systems with no upgrade path and then ask
users to file a bug? That's pretty awesome, how can those people file a
You have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/12/2013 05:30 PM, Christopher Head wrote:
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:51:15 + (UTC)
Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Christopher Head posted on Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:38:14 -0800 as
excerpted:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 20:43:02 +0100 Dirkjan
23 matches
Mail list logo
