Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-20 Thread James Cloos
> "BdG" == Ben de Groot writes: BdG> On 14 March 2010 06:09, James Cloos wrote: >>> "BdG" == Ben de Groot writes: >> BdG> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree. >> >> Nonsense.  That attitude only servers to harm the user base. BdG> You're wrong. It serves to protect o

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-14 Thread Ben de Groot
On 14 March 2010 06:09, James Cloos wrote: >> "BdG" == Ben de Groot writes: > > BdG> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree. > > Nonsense.  That attitude only servers to harm the user base. You're wrong. It serves to protect our users from potentially broken and vulnerable pack

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-13 Thread Maciej Mrozowski
On Sunday 14 of March 2010 06:09:44 James Cloos wrote: > > "BdG" == Ben de Groot writes: > BdG> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree. > > Nonsense. That attitude only servers to harm the user base. > > Leaving them in does not. But leaving them broken and unmaintained in ma

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-13 Thread James Cloos
> "BdG" == Ben de Groot writes: BdG> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree. Nonsense. That attitude only servers to harm the user base. Leaving them in does not. -JimC -- James Cloos OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-13 Thread Markos Chandras
On Friday 12 March 2010 15:18:21 Robert Bradbury wrote: > It would appear that the pending (0321) mask of Qt3 will break > sci-misc/qcad, sci-chemistry/xdrawchem and x11-misc/glunarclock. > [..] > > Thank you, > Robert Bradbury The decision about removing Qt3 has been made 9 months ago, the decis

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-12 Thread Ben de Groot
On 12 March 2010 16:59, Alexis Ballier wrote: > Or like the old gtk-1: completely abandon the package and let the > consumers upgrade slowly. IMHO this is the less annoying approach for > everyone. Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree. That's why we have a treecleaners project. C

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-12 Thread Ben de Groot
On 12 March 2010 14:18, Robert Bradbury wrote: > It would appear that the pending (0321) mask of Qt3 will break > sci-misc/qcad, sci-chemistry/xdrawchem and x11-misc/glunarclock. The mask has already been in place since March 1st. > a) Has research been done to determine whether there are replac

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-12 Thread Maciej Mrozowski
On Friday 12 of March 2010 17:17:01 Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 12-03-2010 08:46:34 -0700, Denis Dupeyron wrote: > > That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not > > wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that > > all disgruntled users and developers

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-12 Thread justin
On 12/03/10 17:17, Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 12-03-2010 08:46:34 -0700, Denis Dupeyron wrote: >> That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not >> wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that >> all disgruntled users and developers create a qt3 project

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-12 Thread Gilles Dartiguelongue
Le vendredi 12 mars 2010 à 16:59 +0100, Alexis Ballier a écrit : > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:46:34 -0700 > Denis Dupeyron wrote: > > [...] > > That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not > > wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that > > all disgrun

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-12 Thread Fabian Groffen
On 12-03-2010 08:46:34 -0700, Denis Dupeyron wrote: > That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not > wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that > all disgruntled users and developers create a qt3 project and > adopt/unmask/re-commit the qt3 librarie

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-12 Thread Alexis Ballier
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:46:34 -0700 Denis Dupeyron wrote: [...] > That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not > wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that > all disgruntled users and developers create a qt3 project and > adopt/unmask/re-commit the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-12 Thread Denis Dupeyron
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 6:18 AM, Robert Bradbury wrote: > It would appear that the pending (0321) mask of Qt3 will break > sci-misc/qcad, sci-chemistry/xdrawchem and x11-misc/glunarclock. I'm not concerned but I feel sympathy for those who use these packages and many others. The decision from the

[gentoo-dev] Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

2010-03-12 Thread Robert Bradbury
It would appear that the pending (0321) mask of Qt3 will break sci-misc/qcad, sci-chemistry/xdrawchem and x11-misc/glunarclock. These are fairly significant science packages for which there are no current (qt4) or "equivalent" packages. While on one hand it may not do much harm to mask Qt3 based