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

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Package removal without proper last-riting
From:       Diego_Elio_Pettenò <flameeyes () flameeyes ! eu>
Date:       2013-11-14 19:45:31
Message-ID: CAHcsgXRk_XtxcUoBssaOiZWVOuFSwL5TBFYX2RS+9WF9THvCYg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:08 AM, Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I wasn't aware last-riting had become general policy.  It was originally
> started by the treecleaner team to give people time to object to
> maintainer-needed removals, and others thought it was a good idea, but it
> was
> always up to the discretion of the maintainer back then.
>

Last riting predates treecleaners by quite a bit.


Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flameeyes@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 14, \
2013 at 3:08 AM, Ryan Hill <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:dirtyepic@gentoo.org" \
target="_blank">dirtyepic@gentoo.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br> <blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex"><div id=":2di" style="overflow:hidden">I wasn&#39;t aware \
last-riting had become general policy.   It was originally<br>

started by the treecleaner team to give people time to object to<br>
maintainer-needed removals, and others thought it was a good idea, but it was<br>
always up to the discretion of the maintainer back \
then.</div></blockquote></div><br>Last riting predates treecleaners by quite a \
bit.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br clear="all"><div>Diego Elio Pettenò — \
Flameeyes<br> <a href="mailto:flameeyes@flameeyes.eu" \
target="_blank">flameeyes@flameeyes.eu</a> — <a href="http://blog.flameeyes.eu/" \
target="_blank">http://blog.flameeyes.eu/</a></div> </div></div>



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