[gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-embedded/sdcc-cvs

2006-05-06 Thread Denis Dupeyron
The repository for SDCC has recently moved from CVS to Subversion. From now on, please use dev-embedded/sdcc-svn instead of dev-embedded/sdcc-cvs. dev-embedded/sdcc-cvs will be masked right now, and then removed in a month or so if nobody complains. Denis. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-embedded/sdcc-cvs

2006-05-06 Thread Simon Stelling
Denis Dupeyron wrote: dev-embedded/sdcc-cvs will be masked right now, and then removed in a month or so if nobody complains. A pkg move might be wise to do, no? -- Kind Regards, Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Developer -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable?

2006-05-06 Thread Richard Fish
On 5/4/06, Bart Braem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What makes us think we can not trust the KDE devs? 1. bugs.gentoo.org 2. bugs.kde.org I personally have been running KDE 3.5 since the RC days...when you actually had to add it to package.unmask. And *yes*, it has had more than it's share of pr

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable?

2006-05-06 Thread Richard Fish
On 5/5/06, Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 060504 Chris Gianelloni wrote: > If we followed others blindly, as so many users suggest, > then we would have stabilized KDE 3.5 ages ago, > and every single one of you KDE users would be complaining > about how our QA sucks because KDE doesn't c

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable?

2006-05-06 Thread Richard Fish
On 5/5/06, Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: All the whining leaves me with the feeling that I'm less interested to work for you. The question "What can I do?" I do never hear. Stop whining, but decide to help or give another distro a try. These are your choices. Just to try to counter

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-embedded/sdcc-cvs

2006-05-06 Thread Denis Dupeyron
On 5/6/06, Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Denis Dupeyron wrote: > > dev-embedded/sdcc-cvs will be masked right now, and then removed in a month > > or so if nobody complains. > > A pkg move might be wise to do, no? > > -- > Kind Regards, > > Simon Stelling > Gentoo/AMD64 Developer

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable?

2006-05-06 Thread Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
On Saturday 06 May 2006 08:48, Philip Webb wrote: > I've seen this stated before, but why does it have to be "_at once_" ? Because 3.4 and 3.5 does _NOT_ mix together! > Many packages have > 1 stable version available, > so users might have KDE 3.4.3 (all) & 3.5.1 (parts) by now, > with the rest

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable?

2006-05-06 Thread Philip Webb
060506 Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten? wrote: > On Saturday 06 May 2006 08:48, Philip Webb wrote: >> I've seen this stated before, but why does it have to be "_at once_" ? > Because 3.4 and 3.5 does _NOT_ mix together! That's not an explanation: it merely restates your assertion. >> Many packages have

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable?

2006-05-06 Thread Jakub Moc
Philip Webb wrote: >>> Any stable version of KDE will need kdelibs kdebase , >>> but otherwise why can't the packages be made stable >>> at least as each big downloadable file becomes ready, if not individually ? >> Because they have to be stable at once. Period. >> Can't go stable piece by piece.

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable?

2006-05-06 Thread Duncan
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Sat, 06 May 2006 13:41:50 +0200: >> Any stable version of KDE will need kdelibs kdebase , but otherwise why >> can't the packages be made stable at least as each big downloadable file >> becomes ready, if not individually

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages that need maintainers

2006-05-06 Thread Tuan Van
Daniel Goller wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 The following packages require a new maintainer, some might just be absorbed into their herds w/o a direct maintainer leaving them to the teams maintaining those herds, others might face extinction w/o a direct maintainer. ./net

[gentoo-dev] Heritage

2006-05-06 Thread Joshua Jackson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I've talked about this multiple times but its fallen on death ears so I'm going to bring it up to the everyone who reads this mailing list. I've noticed a disturbing trend with the website redesign. Larry is disappearing from the site. Most noticeably

Re: [gentoo-dev] Heritage

2006-05-06 Thread Thomas Cort
On Sat, 06 May 2006 21:22:56 -0700 Joshua Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've noticed a disturbing trend with the website redesign. Larry is > disappearing from the site. That is utterly disturbing! I too enjoy Larry the cow, and would like to keep him around and improve his visibility on t

Re: [gentoo-dev] Heritage

2006-05-06 Thread Jonathan Smith
Thomas Cort wrote: On Sat, 06 May 2006 21:22:56 -0700 Joshua Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've noticed a disturbing trend with the website redesign. Larry is disappearing from the site. That is utterly disturbing! I too enjoy Larry the cow, and would like to keep him around and improve

[gentoo-dev] Disenchantment

2006-05-06 Thread Daniel Goller
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 It is with great joy that i report i finally cut myself loose from something that i once loved to do and spend my time on, but since have grown more and more disenchanted with. I don't mind spending my time in front of the screen for hours on end if it

Re: [gentoo-dev] Heritage

2006-05-06 Thread Shyam Mani
Thomas Cort wrote: > That is utterly disturbing! I too enjoy Larry the cow, and would like to keep > him around and improve his visibility on the site. I think he makes a nice > mascot for Gentoo. I completely agree. Let's not try to change things that have been part and parcel of Gentoo for qu