[gentoo-dev] Re: net-mail/mailman-2.1.9-r2: Request for testing

2007-11-27 Thread Duncan
René 'Necoro' Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue, 27 Nov 2007 02:55:08 +0100: > Depends on what PORTAGE_COMPRESS is set to ;) (Don't know WHERE this is > actually being set - but different systems seem to have different values > here). That's a newer po

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount

2007-11-27 Thread Daniel Drake
Markus Ullmann wrote: K, to sum it up then, everything stays like it is atm. I think that makes sense. Yes, it's unrealistic for us to be able to handle all of them, but I think that's a perfectly reasonable situation. It's common for open source projects to have an excess of feature reques

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] Features and documentation

2007-11-27 Thread Donnie Berkholz
How the recent changes happened to allow USE flag descriptions in metadata.xml (which I'm not taking any position on now) gave me an idea. The Linux kernel requires that any needed documentation accompany all changes requiring said documentation -- part of the source-code patch must apply to th

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Features and documentation

2007-11-27 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:21:44 -0800 Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To sum up: No undocumented changes. Define 'change'. -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Features and documentation

2007-11-27 Thread Doug Klima
Donnie Berkholz wrote: > How the recent changes happened to allow USE flag descriptions in > metadata.xml (which I'm not taking any position on now) gave me an idea. > The Linux kernel requires that any needed documentation accompany all > changes requiring said documentation -- part of the sour

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Features and documentation

2007-11-27 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 19:25 Tue 27 Nov , Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:21:44 -0800 > Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > To sum up: No undocumented changes. > > Define 'change'. That was the summary, so you should be able to get the information you want from the paragraph above it.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Features and documentation

2007-11-27 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:36:17 -0800 Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 19:25 Tue 27 Nov , Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:21:44 -0800 > > Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > To sum up: No undocumented changes. > > > > Define 'change'. > > That was th

Re: [gentoo-dev] Changes to rox.eclass

2007-11-27 Thread Petteri Räty
Jim Ramsay kirjoitti: > I know I'm the only one who uses this, but thought it would be prudent > to post this here before I actually commit it, in case I'm doing > something obviously wrong, or if you bash maniacs out there can think > of better ways to do things I've done here. > > This is mostly

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Features and documentation

2007-11-27 Thread Alec Warner
On 11/27/07, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How the recent changes happened to allow USE flag descriptions in > metadata.xml (which I'm not taking any position on now) gave me an idea. > The Linux kernel requires that any needed documentation accompany all > changes requiring said doc

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Features and documentation

2007-11-27 Thread Rémi Cardona
Alec Warner wrote: > On 11/27/07, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> How the recent changes happened to allow USE flag descriptions in >> metadata.xml (which I'm not taking any position on now) gave me an idea. >> The Linux kernel requires that any needed documentation accompany all >> c