> On Mon, 06 Jun 2016, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> Usually only two letter language codes suffice, but can be limited with
> country codes with a 'll_CC' formatting, where 'll' is the language code
> and 'CC' is the country code, e.g en_GB. Some rare languages also have
> three letter language code
On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 03:22:34 +0300
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> First draft of news item for proceeding with LINGUAS USE_EXPAND rename
> to L10N independently of the INSTALL_MASK feature additions.
>
> I hope English natives will improve the sentence flow and grammar here
> :)
> Perhaps there's also a
On 05/06/16 22:55, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> dev-util/nsis curretly has no maintainer. It has a [critical security
> bug filed against it]. Does anyone want to pick it up? if not we'll
> start a last rite process for it.
>
> [critical security bug filed against it]
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/sh
First draft of news item for proceeding with LINGUAS USE_EXPAND rename
to L10N independently of the INSTALL_MASK feature additions.
I hope English natives will improve the sentence flow and grammar here
:)
Perhaps there's also a better title than with the technical USE_EXPAND
mention.
Title: LIN
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2016-06-05 23:59 UTC.
Removals:
dev-lang/dmd-bin 20160601-16:05 kensington 83cf900
net-misc/asterisk-spandsp_codec_g726 20160605-15:40 kensington 53ee70c
net-p2p/nap
Sunday 05 Jun 2016 19:39:26, Yury German wrote :
> app-text/htmltidy currently has no maintainers. It has a vulnerability
> [Security Bug] filed against it. And a number of other [package depend
> on it]. Is nyone willing to pick it up?
>
> [Secuity Bug]
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5
app-text/htmltidy currently has no maintainers. It has a vulnerability
[Security Bug] filed against it. And a number of other [package depend
on it]. Is nyone willing to pick it up?
[Secuity Bug]
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=561452
[package depend on it]
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/o
dev-util/nsis curretly has no maintainer. It has a [critical security
bug filed against it]. Does anyone want to pick it up? if not we'll
start a last rite process for it.
[critical security bug filed against it]
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=568398
--
Kristian Fiskerstrand
OpenPGP cert
On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 13:47:48 +0200 Patrice Clement wrote:
> # Patrice Clement (5 Jun 2016)
> # Unmaintained ebuilds. Upstream is either dead or AWOL. Also, most of these
> # ebuilds are still sitting in ~arch after years in the tree.
Excuse me, but since when and based on what authority dead HOME
On 06/05/2016 02:05 PM, james wrote:
> On 06/05/2016 12:15 PM, Daniel Campbell (zlg) wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA512
>>
>> On June 5, 2016 9:04:26 AM PDT, "Michał Górny" wrote:
>>> Hello, everyone.
>>>
>>> I have the pleasure to announce that a few improvements have be
On 06/05/2016 12:15 PM, Daniel Campbell (zlg) wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On June 5, 2016 9:04:26 AM PDT, "Michał Górny" wrote:
Hello, everyone.
I have the pleasure to announce that a few improvements have been
deployed by the Repository mirror & CI project today.
On 05/06/16 20:04, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 05, 2016 at 01:47:48PM +0200, Patrice Clement wrote:
>> dev-util/cdecl
>> dev-util/dwarves
>> dev-util/intel2gas
>> dev-util/lsuio
>> dev-util/mock
>> dev-util/par
>> dev-util/tinlink
>> dev-util/usb-robot
> I've used the above subset of thes
On Sun, Jun 05, 2016 at 01:47:48PM +0200, Patrice Clement wrote:
> dev-util/cdecl
> dev-util/dwarves
> dev-util/intel2gas
> dev-util/lsuio
> dev-util/mock
> dev-util/par
> dev-util/tinlink
> dev-util/usb-robot
I've used the above subset of these, so I'll review the upstreams to see
if they just mov
On 6 June 2016 at 05:34, rindeal wrote:
> efore merging to master they do a rebase+force push,
> let the CI check it, and if it passes they're allowed to merge it. No
> cherry-picking involved. Master is then always clean and happy. I'm
> not sure how well it scales, but for the 100-150 commits/da
On 5 June 2016 at 19:13, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 6 June 2016 at 05:09, rindeal wrote:
>> It is not, unless CI filters the broken commits in some miraculous
>> way. With the current approach, both stable and master branch will
>> contain the pollution of broken commits + their fixes, instead of
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On June 5, 2016 9:04:26 AM PDT, "Michał Górny" wrote:
>Hello, everyone.
>
>I have the pleasure to announce that a few improvements have been
>deployed by the Repository mirror & CI project today.
>
>
>1. The mirror for 'gentoo' repository [1] now ha
On 6 June 2016 at 05:09, rindeal wrote:
> It is not, unless CI filters the broken commits in some miraculous
> way. With the current approach, both stable and master branch will
> contain the pollution of broken commits + their fixes, instead of
> having good commits only.
Doing that is of cours
On 05/06/16 18:09, rindeal wrote:
> On 5 June 2016 at 18:53, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>> On 05/06/16 17:49, rindeal wrote:
>>> On 5 June 2016 at 18:40, Kent Fredric wrote:
On 6 June 2016 at 04:31, rindeal wrote:
> Isn't no commit approach better than having broken commit + revert
> comm
On 5 June 2016 at 18:53, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> On 05/06/16 17:49, rindeal wrote:
>> On 5 June 2016 at 18:40, Kent Fredric wrote:
>>> On 6 June 2016 at 04:31, rindeal wrote:
Isn't no commit approach better than having broken commit + revert
commit?
>>>
>>> Huh?
>>>
>>> Its doing "repli
On 6 June 2016 at 04:49, rindeal wrote:
> I'd like to see the master branch free of commits which do not pass
> CI, instead of having broken commits and holding master back until
> revert commits are introduced.
Just pretend "stable" is called "master" and pretend "master" is called "devel"
->
On 05/06/16 17:49, rindeal wrote:
> On 5 June 2016 at 18:40, Kent Fredric wrote:
>> On 6 June 2016 at 04:31, rindeal wrote:
>>> Isn't no commit approach better than having broken commit + revert
>>> commit?
>>
>> Huh?
>>
>> Its doing "replicate to github on pass using a merge commit".
> I'd like
On 5 June 2016 at 18:40, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 6 June 2016 at 04:31, rindeal wrote:
>> Isn't no commit approach better than having broken commit + revert
>> commit?
>
>
> Huh?
>
> Its doing "replicate to github on pass using a merge commit".
I'd like to see the master branch free of commits w
On 6 June 2016 at 04:31, rindeal wrote:
> Isn't no commit approach better than having broken commit + revert
> commit?
Huh?
Its doing "replicate to github on pass using a merge commit".
--
Kent
KENTNL - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL
On 5 June 2016 at 18:04, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello, everyone.
>
> I have the pleasure to announce that a few improvements have been
> deployed by the Repository mirror & CI project today.
>
>
> 1. The mirror for 'gentoo' repository [1] now has a default 'stable'
> branch. It is updated automatic
Hello, everyone.
I have the pleasure to announce that a few improvements have been
deployed by the Repository mirror & CI project today.
1. The mirror for 'gentoo' repository [1] now has a default 'stable'
branch. It is updated automatically by the gentoo-ci checker,
and therefore always contain
New version in available at
https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/1425. Check it out, it's cool.
# Patrice Clement (5 Jun 2016)
# Unmaintained ebuilds. Upstream is either dead or AWOL. Also, most of these
# ebuilds are still sitting in ~arch after years in the tree.
# Masked for removal in 30 days.
dev-util/ccmalloc
dev-util/dwarves
dev-util/tinlink
dev-util/cdecl
dev-util/redet
dev-util/eggy
27 matches
Mail list logo
