Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Git commit mails/CIA.vc notifications

2011-02-04 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 22:41:57 + (UTC) Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > Jeroen Roovers posted on Fri, 04 Feb 2011 16:08:24 +0100 as excerpted: > > > On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 03:26:16 +0100 Christian Ruppert > > wrote: > > > >> Hey guys, > > > > Only half of people? :) > > That's just /beggi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Git commit mails/CIA.vc notifications

2011-02-04 Thread George Prowse
On 04/02/2011 22:41, Duncan wrote: Jeroen Roovers posted on Fri, 04 Feb 2011 16:08:24 +0100 as excerpted: On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 03:26:16 +0100 Christian Ruppert wrote: Hey guys, Only half of people? :) That's just /begging/ a reply. No. It wasn't. Please stop filling up my inbox. Yes I k

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: lince and slmodem

2011-02-04 Thread Chris Richards
On 02/04/2011 05:24 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: This said, I'd suggest users and developers alike to add themselves (or ask to be added) to the metadata.xml files for packages requiring specific hardware support, so that even if one maintainer ends up not being active, we have a list of people

[gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: lince and slmodem

2011-02-04 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
Il giorno mer, 02/02/2011 alle 01.33 +, Matt Turner ha scritto: > > Maybe you did this already, but it seems like the amount of time spent > masking a package could have been spent poking whoever is supposed to > be maintaining it (Alin Năstac > I can't obviously speak for Alin, but I'd lik

[gentoo-dev] Re: Git commit mails/CIA.vc notifications

2011-02-04 Thread Duncan
Jeroen Roovers posted on Fri, 04 Feb 2011 16:08:24 +0100 as excerpted: > On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 03:26:16 +0100 Christian Ruppert > wrote: > >> Hey guys, > > Only half of people? :) That's just /begging/ a reply. (In reference to "begging the question" and the controversy surrounding it. Linguist

Re: [gentoo-dev] Unused eclasses

2011-02-04 Thread Sebastian Pipping
I assume (1) that Yannick is not subscribed to gentoo-dev, and (2) that his mail is not private to him so I dare to forward his mail to you. Yannick, thanks for investigating. >From the output he shares I conclude that the only eclasses truly not used anymore are: - games-q3mod - ruby-gnome2 - moz

Re: [gentoo-dev] Git commit mails/CIA.vc notifications

2011-02-04 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 03:26:16 +0100 Christian Ruppert wrote: > Hey guys, Only half of people? :) jer

[gentoo-dev] Re: Unused eclasses

2011-02-04 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
Il giorno mar, 01/02/2011 alle 19.57 +0100, Tomáš Chvátal ha scritto: > > ruby-gnome2.eclass Please proceed, it'll be a while before gems.eclass is removed but at least this one can be killed now. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes http://blog.flameeyes.eu/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Unused eclasses

2011-02-04 Thread Sebastian Pipping
On 02/01/11 19:57, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > Hello ladies, > Following cleanup of eclasses in main tree there still are few eclasses > that are not used at all. I guess that applies to the main tree. If we do care if any of them are used in an overlay, Ycarus of gpo.zugaina.org may find an answer rat

Re: [gentoo-dev] Git commit mails/CIA.vc notifications

2011-02-04 Thread Christian Ruppert
Ah, btw. it is also possible to exclude files from commit mails/cia. This is useful for e.g. Manifest files. I'll try to enable it by default for gentoo overlays. -- Regards, Christian Ruppert Role: Gentoo Linux developer, Bugzilla administrator and Infrastructure member Fingerprint: EEB1 C341 7C