Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a): > | Accumulating broken old vulnerable and unsupported junk in tree > > There is no accumulation. It's already there. And if packages are that > bad, perhaps you should ask yourself why they have a stable keyword at > all.
Eh, sure there won't be any accumulation of broken junk _if_ the ebuild never gets a version bump. (Then it should probably be removed altogether after a reasonable period of time once it gets broken). That's not what are we talking about here. Otherwise, apparently the junk accumulates there. As an example - it's really wonderful to have 3 KDE slots plus multiple versions for each in the tree just because some arch team hasn't keyworded/stabilized anything newer for ages. Makes everything faster and all... > | for the sole sake of arches that noone cares about enough to keyword > | something newer for months > > If you're taking that argument, one could just as easily claim that the > packages should be removed entirely since the arch teams don't care > enough to keyword them. See above, perhaps? And, we have some ebuilds without any keywords in the tree? If we do, then yes, they should be removed. -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
