On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 14:04:19 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:11:30 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
> > Right now we have the following components:
> >
> > - Applications,
> > - baselayout,
> > - Core system,
> > - Development,
> > - Eclasses and Profiles,
> > - Games,
> > - GC
> > > Keeping the big pseudo-category split doesn't make much sense as most
> > > of the packages can't be fit easily into a specific group and it only
> > > confuses users. GNOME & KDE aren't very clear either, especially for
> > > non-core packages (like: is systemd a GNOME package?). Having the
On 15/06/16 21:11, Michał Górny wrote:
> I would personally go for the following layout:
>
> - All packages,
> - Core system [includes baselayout],
> - Eclasses and Profiles,
> - GCC Porting,
> - Hardened,
> - Keywording & Stabilization,
> - New packages ('New ebuilds' previously),
> - SELinux.
S
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 03:32:03PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 16:18:20 +0300
> Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 14:04:19 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:11:30 +0200
> > > Michał Górny wrote:
> > >
> > > > Right now we have the foll
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:47:12 -0400
Joshua Kinard wrote:
> On 06/16/2016 08:04, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:11:30 +0200
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> >> Right now we have the following components:
> >>
> >> - Applications,
> >> - baselayout,
> >> - Core system,
> >> - Develo
On 06/16/2016 08:04, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:11:30 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
>> Right now we have the following components:
>>
>> - Applications,
>> - baselayout,
>> - Core system,
>> - Development,
>> - Eclasses and Profiles,
>> - Games,
>> - GCC Porting,
>> - GNOME,
>>
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 16:18:20 +0300
Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 14:04:19 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:11:30 +0200
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > > Right now we have the following components:
> > >
> > > - Applications,
> > > - baselayout,
> > > - Cor
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 14:04:19 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:11:30 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
> > Right now we have the following components:
> >
> > - Applications,
> > - baselayout,
> > - Core system,
> > - Development,
> > - Eclasses and Profiles,
> > - Games,
> > - GCC
On 17 June 2016 at 00:04, Michał Górny wrote:
> Revision two:
>
> - Current packages [bug-wranglers@],
> - Eclasses [bug-wranglers@],
> - Hardened [hardened@],
> - New packages [bug-wranglers@],
> - Overlays [overlays@],
> - Profiles [bug-wranglers@],
> - SELinux [selinux@].
"Overlays" seems a l
On 16/06/16 13:04, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:11:30 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
>> Right now we have the following components:
>>
>> - Applications,
>> - baselayout,
>> - Core system,
>> - Development,
>> - Eclasses and Profiles,
>> - Games,
>> - GCC Porting,
>> - GNOME,
>> - H
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:11:30 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
>> Right now we have the following components:
>>
>> - Applications,
>> - baselayout,
>> - Core system,
>> - Development,
>> - Eclasses and Profiles,
>> - Games,
>> - GCC Porting,
>>
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:11:30 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> Right now we have the following components:
>
> - Applications,
> - baselayout,
> - Core system,
> - Development,
> - Eclasses and Profiles,
> - Games,
> - GCC Porting,
> - GNOME,
> - Hardened,
> - Java,
> - KDE,
> - Keywording & Stabiliza
15.06.2016 22:11, Michał Górny пишет:
Hello, everyone.
On bug #577398, Pacho has requested removing the 'Development'
component that's rarely used according to its description. However, I'd
rather not remove a single component when it fits the component split
currently used there.
Right now w
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:01:52 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" wrote:
> > Right now we have the following components:
> >
> > - Applications,
> merge with unspecified
Merging is impossible.
> > - Core system,
> autoassign to base-system?
Will base-system handle systemd bugs? I doubt it. It remin
On 06/15/2016 12:11 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello, everyone.
>
> On bug #577398, Pacho has requested removing the 'Development'
> component that's rarely used according to its description. However, I'd
> rather not remove a single component when it fits the component split
> currently used there
> Right now we have the following components:
>
> - Applications,
merge with unspecified
> - Core system,
autoassign to base-system?
> - Development,
makes no sense, merge with unspecified
> - Eclasses and Profiles,
split into eclasses and profiles
> - Games,
merge with applications
> - Java
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Davide Pesavento wrote:
> We could also have separate components for "keywording" vs
> "stabilization", which would make the use of STABLEREQ/KEYWORDREQ
> keywords obsolete at the same time.
The STABLEREQ keyword would still be useful for security bugs, where
the
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:57:04 +0200
Davide Pesavento wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > I would personally go for the following layout:
> >
> > - All packages,
> > - Core system [includes baselayout],
> > - Eclasses and Profiles,
> > - GCC Porting,
> > - Hardened,
>
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> I would personally go for the following layout:
>
> - All packages,
> - Core system [includes baselayout],
> - Eclasses and Profiles,
> - GCC Porting,
> - Hardened,
> - Keywording & Stabilization,
> - New packages ('New ebuilds' previously),
>
Hello, everyone.
On bug #577398, Pacho has requested removing the 'Development'
component that's rarely used according to its description. However, I'd
rather not remove a single component when it fits the component split
currently used there.
Right now we have the following components:
- Applic
20 matches
Mail list logo
