Hi guys,
if nobody has an objection to it, i'll take maintainership of the
fwbuilder/libfwbuilder ebuilds since they are in need of love.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 09:26:18PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
> from the tree, for the week ending 2007-07-29 23h59 UTC.
Ignore this one, it's the next weeks run due to a cron burp.
--
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux Dev
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2007-07-22 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
media-plugins/banshee-official-plugins 2007-07-17 03:41:26 drac
mail-client/muttng 2007-07-19 17:47:28 grobian
dev-java/bluej-bin
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2007-07-29 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
games-fps/blackshades-cvs 2007-07-23 12:41:47 nyhm
dev-cpp/libbonobomm 2007-07-24 01:35:02 leio
dev-cpp/libbonobouimm 2007-0
Christina Fullam schrieb:
> Just a reminder about nominations and voting...
> If anyone is still interested in running, you have one week left for
> nominations.
> Most who have accepted havent told us why we should vote for them. While
> that information is not required perhaps it should be if we
On 7/21/07, Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is just a heads up for getting baselayout-2 stable. Next week I
plan to put baselayout-2.0.0_rc1 into the tree without any keywords and
it will be removed from package.mask (keeping the current alphas masked
though). Arch teams will then be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stratos Psomadakis wrote:
> i'm a bit confused...
> i have the same problem...
> i try to make an upgrade and it says that pidgin is going to be rebuilt
> without the msn use flag(althoug i have enabled the use flag for
> pidgin,in /etc/portage/package
i'm a bit confused...
i have the same problem...
i try to make an upgrade and it says that pidgin is going to be rebuilt
without the msn use flag(althoug i have enabled the use flag for
pidgin,in /etc/portage/package.use)...
what's the problem?...is there a solution?...
:/
thx...
O/H Christian Faul
Ciaran McCreesh schrieb:
> And there aren't specification-compliant Yaml libraries for Ruby,
> Python or Perl. That's important. If you're using the thing that Syck
> generates, you're not using Yaml.
Sorry for starting this off-topic discussion. I'd suggest that we first
concentrate on what we wa
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:11:35 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Yaml looks nicer than XML on the surface, but unfortunately it's
> > still a pain in the ass to handle...
> >
>
> Basically because there aren't nicer libraries for languages different
> than r
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> Yaml looks nicer than XML on the surface, but unfortunately it's still a
> pain in the ass to handle...
>
Basically because there aren't nicer libraries for languages different
than ruby python and perl... =/
lu
--
Luca Barbato
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.
Yesterday night I tried to reply but I was too tired...
Christina Fullam wrote:
> Just a reminder about nominations and voting...
> If anyone is still interested in running, you have one week left for
> nominations.
> Most who have accepted havent told us why we should vote for them. While
> that
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:46:05 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > The only specification-compliant yaml parser is written in C, has
> > only the bottom two layers of the stack and no usable external
> > bindings... Perhaps you mean "something that's basically y
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> The only specification-compliant yaml parser is written in C, has
> only the bottom two layers of the stack and no usable external
> bindings... Perhaps you mean "something that's basically yaml except
> with reserved string-start characters not handled correctly", in which
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:25:56 +0200
"Wulf C. Krueger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've said my piece. You'll vote for me if you agree with my
> > technical decisions and you find yourself siding with me (even
> > mentally) in the few discussions I take part in on -dev and #-dev.
>
> I can't say
On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 14:25 +0200, Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
> I can't say much about your technical decisions because I haven't
> consciously seen any, I rarely see you take part in any discussions.
Maybe that's because -dev wasn't a forum for technical discussion.
Hopefully that might change.
>
Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> Christian Faulhammer wrote:
>> Petteri Rýty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>> I did see anything in devmanual taking a stance on this issue:
>>> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/variables/index.html
>>> What do you think about adding a sentence or two saying tha
Christina Fullam kirjoitti:
> Just a reminder about nominations and voting...
> If anyone is still interested in running, you have one week left for
> nominations.
> Most who have accepted havent told us why we should vote for them. While
> that information is not required perhaps it should be if w
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:18:46 +0200
Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh schrieb:
> > On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:44:52 +0200
> > "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Perhaps we should just move DESCRIPTIONs to metadata. That would
> >> make it impossible to us
Petteri Räty schrieb:
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=186454
In regard to this it makes sense to add a check (but only a warning) to
repoman and document it in the devmanual.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Ciaran McCreesh schrieb:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:44:52 +0200
> "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Perhaps we should just move DESCRIPTIONs to metadata. That would make
>> it impossible to use ${PV} and more importantly also remove some
>> duplication.
>
> Got to be careful he
Petteri Räty schrieb:
> Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti:
>> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:06:40 +0300
>> Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> But is there anything that makes use of version specific DESCRIPTION
>>> atoms?
>> Yep. Have a look at sys-devel/gcc for example. Some versions include
>> various
On Tuesday, 24. July 2007 14:26, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti:
> > On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:44:52 +0200
> >
> > "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Perhaps we should just move DESCRIPTIONs to metadata. That would
> >> make it impossible to use ${PV} and more i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Marijn Schouten (hkBst) kirjoitti:
>> Perhaps we should just move DESCRIPTIONs to metadata. That would make it
>> impossible to use ${PV} and more importantly also remove some duplication.
>
>
>
>
> sounds like something for EAP
Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:44:52 +0200
> "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Perhaps we should just move DESCRIPTIONs to metadata. That would make
>> it impossible to use ${PV} and more importantly also remove some
>> duplication.
>
> Got to be careful
Hello Roy!
I've said my piece. You'll vote for me if you agree with my technical
decisions and you find yourself siding with me (even mentally) in the
few discussions I take part in on -dev and #-dev.
I can't say much about your technical decisions because I haven't
consciously seen any, I r
Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:06:40 +0300
> Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> But is there anything that makes use of version specific DESCRIPTION
>> atoms?
>
> Yep. Have a look at sys-devel/gcc for example. Some versions include
> various extensions, and say so in D
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:44:52 +0200
"Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps we should just move DESCRIPTIONs to metadata. That would make
> it impossible to use ${PV} and more importantly also remove some
> duplication.
Got to be careful here. In the past it's been stated tha
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:06:40 +0300
Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But is there anything that makes use of version specific DESCRIPTION
> atoms?
Yep. Have a look at sys-devel/gcc for example. Some versions include
various extensions, and say so in DESCRIPTION.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
sig
Tiziano Müller wrote:
As far as I understood it, having DESCRIPTION in the ebuild itself
(rather than in metadata) means that DESCRIPTION is allowed to change
between versions, whether "automatically" by using a version-dependent
variable or "manually".
Well, from what I understand, DESCRIPTION
Tiziano Müller kirjoitti:
> Petteri Räty schrieb:
>> Currently there are some ebuilds in the tree that use ${PV} in
>> description which leads to results like:
>> Description: Documentation (including API Javadocs) for
>> Java SDK version 1.6.0
>>
>> I did see anything in devmanual tak
Marijn Schouten (hkBst) kirjoitti:
> Christian Faulhammer wrote:
>> Petteri Rýty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>> I did see anything in devmanual taking a stance on this issue:
>>> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/variables/index.html
>>> What do you think about adding a sentence or two saying
Petteri Räty schrieb:
> Currently there are some ebuilds in the tree that use ${PV} in
> description which leads to results like:
> Description: Documentation (including API Javadocs) for
> Java SDK version 1.6.0
>
> I did see anything in devmanual taking a stance on this issue:
> htt
Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
Perhaps we should just move DESCRIPTIONs to metadata. That would make it
impossible to use ${PV} and more importantly also remove some duplication.
I think that this is a great idea, for the reasons which you stated. I
certainly hope this will not be yet another
Ryan Hill wrote:
> # Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (23 Jul 2007)
> # duplicated by media-fonts/artwiz-aleczapka-en. use that instead.
> # Bug #186400
> media-fonts/artwiz-fonts
Unmasked until artwiz-aleczapka-en gets the appropriate keywording.
Sorry about that.
--
dirtyepicyou'd be tosse
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> Petteri R�ty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> I did see anything in devmanual taking a stance on this issue:
>> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/variables/index.html
>> What do you think about adding a sentence or two
Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I did see anything in devmanual taking a stance on this issue:
> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/variables/index.html
> What do you think about adding a sentence or two saying that you
> should not use version numbers in DESCRIPTION? This could even b
Currently there are some ebuilds in the tree that use ${PV} in
description which leads to results like:
Description: Documentation (including API Javadocs) for
Java SDK version 1.6.0
I did see anything in devmanual taking a stance on this issue:
http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writ
Ryan Hill wrote:
> Michael Cummings wrote:
>
a. The Project Will Be Free Software. The Conservancy and the Project
agree that
any software distributed by the Project will be distributed solely as
Free Software.
>
>>> If that's not a problem I think this is a great idea.
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 21:55:16 +0200
Benedikt Boehm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 23:17:46 +0200
> Michael Hanselmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 10:05:23PM +0200, Benedikt Boehm wrote:
> > > > qmail_base_install should be split in smaller functions,
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Well, the "best" for us is if it is already stable in the tree before
> we snapshot, as that means it was tested and stabilized prior to our
> snapshot and likely has more QA done on it before we even start the
> release. If we can do that, then Release Eng
Roy Marples escribió:
On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 13:30 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
We'll definitely want the same version stable across the board. I'll be
sure to work with Roy and you to ensure we come to an agreement on what
to use and that we're all on the same page.
Fair enough.
Should I o
On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 17:38 -0700, Christina Fullam wrote:
> Just a reminder about nominations and voting...
> If anyone is still interested in running, you have one week left for
> nominations.
> Most who have accepted havent told us why we should vote for them. While
> that information is not req
43 matches
Mail list logo
