-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
cilly wrote:
> On Jun 12, 2007, at 12:55 PM, Marius Mauch wrote:
>> - a mistake in the ebuild prevents installation for 10% of the users,
>> but doesn't affect runtime behavior. SHould we bump it just for that
>> and "force" the other 90% of the users to perform a pointless update?
>
> Yes. This is in general a good idea, any mistake in an ebuild should be
> corrected by increasing the version number. I am not aware what the
> guide-lines say, but it is my opinion to let others know: the ebuild was
> buggy, see changelog... bla bla bla
BEARD! If an ebuild I maintain gets a fix so that it can now build for
mips (or arm, or any other vital, important, but realistically small,
small, small segment of the user community) where it didn't before, and
it doesn't affect the other users, i'm not bumping it. I fail to see the
point in bumping a package when the only change is
use arm && doblah
what's the point?
- --
- -----o()o----------------------------------------------
Michael Cummings | #gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl
Gentoo Perl Dev | on irc.freenode.net
Gentoo/SPARC
Gentoo/AMD64
GPG: 0543 6FA3 5F82 3A76 3BF7 8323 AB5C ED4E 9E7F 4E2E
- -----o()o----------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGbo+lq1ztTp5/Ti4RApULAJ9eCKY8+7+Oa7X4lt2hrAPOK5XX0ACfRl03
6Ti0/2u+BgqvM9n42H+Cksk=
=zrPV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
