On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 10:46:23 -0600 Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | Where is this general consensus documented (other than an email sent | out a few days ago). I'd have to go with Paul on this assumption. I | don't see the problem with keeping a package such as stu's in portage | as long as it doesn't affect other users. Do you honesty expect that | we will get a sterile tree out of this? Please focus your QA efforts | are more important and visible issues. Going on a witch hunt to fix | one problem compared to the bigger issues we know we have is simply | silly. This is really starting to look like a power issue rather than | a QA issue.
You know, funnily enough, QA has filed a whole heap of bugs on the conflicting digest issue. With every other maintainer for bugs we've filed, the developer in question has worked with us to fix the issue, and thanked us for pointing out the problem. The only reason this one has gone so far is because of Stuart repeatedly closing the bug off and refusing to discuss alternatives. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
