[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking virtuals stable
From:       Michael Cummings <mcummings () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2007-05-31 16:07:35
Message-ID: 465EF2C7.2080405 () gentoo ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> I have seen many Perl virtuals go straight to stable and haven't ever
> experienced any adverse effects. :)

well, that's the idea :) But like I think it was Graham said in another
subthread of this, perl team's virtuals only go to stable if both (in
our case, there are usually only 2 possible sources for fulfillment)
deps are already stable, so really all you're doing is updating a
pointer reference. um. can i be more confusing? let's find out!

> 
>> /me hopes some arch brains step in, like weeve in particular, who is
>> usually far more eloquent at defending an arch's position
> 
> Oh sorry. :)

bah - that was me failing to finish the sentence that in my head
concluded as "than me." That and softserve machines aside, weeve and
gustovoz are pretty (in a positive sense) vocal about arch related
items, so they were the ones that came to mind when i threw in the
comment about arch's commenting.

Double bah. I think i've dug a good hole here. Let me get in it.

- --

- -----o()o----------------------------------------------
Michael Cummings   |    #gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl
Gentoo Perl Dev    |    on irc.freenode.net
Gentoo/SPARC
Gentoo/AMD64
GPG: 0543 6FA3 5F82 3A76 3BF7  8323 AB5C ED4E 9E7F 4E2E
- -----o()o----------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGXvLHq1ztTp5/Ti4RAtf/AKCLWpCWcsD+m8njHSdfWltt+owQ1gCfaV2P
S4o2MhHNJFs2gv2oN6yms/A=
=sj0h
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]