On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 03:41 +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> On 2020-05-06 00:52, James Le Cuirot wrote:
> > On Tue, 05 May 2020 22:19:59 +0200
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> > > WDYT?
> >
> > Play it safe. -* is frequently used for binary packages where an
> > arch
> > will simply either work or
On 2020-05-06 00:52, James Le Cuirot wrote:
> On Tue, 05 May 2020 22:19:59 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>>
>> WDYT?
>
> Play it safe. -* is frequently used for binary packages where an arch
> will simply either work or it won't, with little likelihood of the
> situation changing. -arch is so
On Tue, 05 May 2020 22:19:59 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> Hi,
>
> TL;DR: should NATTkA reject request to keyword on arch if the ebuild has
> '-arch' (or '-*') in KEYWORDS already?
>
>
> Background: I've recently been rekeywording two packages that gained
> dependency on gevent. When I was
Hi,
TL;DR: should NATTkA reject request to keyword on arch if the ebuild has
'-arch' (or '-*') in KEYWORDS already?
Background: I've recently been rekeywording two packages that gained
dependency on gevent. When I was mass-requesting rekeywording, it
escaped my attention that gevent is
