Quoth the Devon Miller > You both seem to be arguing about what constitutes stable. And there are 2 > different definitions: stable as defined by the upstream source and stable > as defined in portage.
Wrong. I am perfectly aware of what "stable" and "unstable" means to portage. I _was_ arguing a point based on Alexander's question which I felt was ambiguous. Apparently I am the only one who thought it was ambiguous, ha ha, stupid me. The entire rest of that sub-thread was me and Alexander arguing faulty premises based on this initial misunderstanding, and it would best be ignored by everyone. <snip> > Now, Darren has added a bug for 0.9.3 and a month later, it's still waiting > to get added to portage. > His issue is 0.9.1 and 0.9.2 should have been stable by now. That is an issue, but not one I am losing sleep over, and not one that I am arguing in this thread... If everyone folowing this thread from the sidelines could just read my first response to the OP: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/172487 You can see here I explained to the OP that the newer version was not stable, but he could access it using "~x86" keyword. I went on to explain that if he wanted the latest upstream version he could use an overlay. Mark my words: I _do not_ think the upstream stable version should, automatically or otherwise, be portage's stable version. I never said any such thing in any mail to this thread. <snip> > I would suggest Darren look through the develoiper list ( > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/roll-call/userinfo.xml) for developers > handling media-sound. Add them to the cc list on the 0.9.2 ebuild and add a > comment asking that it be marked stable. And ask for the 0.9.3 to be added > as ~x86 I will try this. Thank you. > dcm -d -- darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org "...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..." - Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
