On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 03:29:10PM +0100, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > Il giorno dom, 21/11/2010 alle 13.11 +0000, Markos Chandras ha scritto: > > > > My proposal is to keep empty keywords on live ebuilds without masking > > them via package.mask > > The reason why many of them are in p.mask is usually because _I_ added > them there as they didn't mask with KEYWORDS="", and simply dropping > keywords would have users angry. This is the alternative approach. Retain the keywords and mask the package which doesn't look that safe in case you have both a normal version and a live ebuild masked. Then users should pay extra attention which version they unmask. > > > > Users interpret this as a 'double masking' which in fact it is since > > they need to touch two files before they are able to use the package. > > Fine by me, but the problem remains that users won't know _why_ the > package is masked, way too many times. I don't understand that. The default policy would be empty keywords. If you need to mask a live ebuild using package.mask because e.g master branch is terribly broken or whatever then it makes sense. But I am not sure I understand what you are saying :-) > > -- > Diego Elio Pettenò — “Flameeyes” > http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ > > If you found a .asc file in this mail and know not what it is, > it's a GnuPG digital signature: http://www.gnupg.org/ > >
-- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org Key ID: 441AC410 Key FP: AAD0 8591 E3CD 445D 6411 3477 F7F7 1E8E 441A C410
pgpeCubfRreEw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
