diff options
author | Ulrich Müller <ulm@gentoo.org> | 2019-11-07 14:32:10 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ulrich Müller <ulm@gentoo.org> | 2019-11-11 10:47:00 +0100 |
commit | 2c982d20e00c92e9f314af17432a0bba4404cd6b (patch) | |
tree | 9ee0d6259ef6142cf97379c0300eabdc7c002ac1 /glep-0040.rst | |
parent | glep-0075: Update for reference implementation (diff) | |
download | glep-2c982d20e00c92e9f314af17432a0bba4404cd6b.tar.gz glep-2c982d20e00c92e9f314af17432a0bba4404cd6b.tar.bz2 glep-2c982d20e00c92e9f314af17432a0bba4404cd6b.zip |
Replace outdated mail archive URLs.
Globally replace URLs pointing to gmane.org or marc.theaimsgroup.com,
preferably by archives.gentoo.org if the article is available there.
As suggested by robbat2, also add the Message-ID and bibliographical
information, in order to have a permanent reference to the message.
Notes on single GLEPs:
- GLEP 40: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/31060 had
pointed to the first message of the thread (by g2boojum), not to
stuart's followup. Corrected.
- GLEP 57: Two messages in gentoo-dev from January/February 2005 and
one message in gentoo-security from April 2003 are missing from
Gentoo archives. Use marc.info instead.
Signed-off-by: Ulrich Müller <ulm@gentoo.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'glep-0040.rst')
-rw-r--r-- | glep-0040.rst | 30 |
1 files changed, 19 insertions, 11 deletions
diff --git a/glep-0040.rst b/glep-0040.rst index a16409d..e91dc94 100644 --- a/glep-0040.rst +++ b/glep-0040.rst @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Type: Standards Track Status: Final Version: 1 Created: 2005-09-03 -Last-Modified: 2014-01-22 +Last-Modified: 2019-11-07 Post-History: 2005-09-06, 2005-09-15, 2006-09-03 Content-Type: text/x-rst --- @@ -20,13 +20,15 @@ a robust x86 arch team, so this GLEP is final. Credits ======= -This GLEP originated from a rather contentious discussion_ on gentoo-dev +This GLEP originated from a rather contentious discussion [#GG]_ on gentoo-dev about combining the x86 and amd64 keywords. This GLEP attempts to get at the heart of that discontent. The proposed stable-keyword guidelines have been -lifted verbatim from `The Doc`_. +lifted verbatim from [#Devmanual]_. -.. _discussion: https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/linux.gentoo.dev/EwjbOaNLFio -.. _The Doc: http://dev.gentoo.org/~plasmaroo/devmanual +.. [#GG] Grant Goodyear. "Combining x86 and amd64". gentoo-dev mailing list, + 2005-09-01, Message-ID 20050901171028.GW18440\@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu, + https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/c8ae985881502e2ff9a523b1db57fb55 +.. [#Devmanual] https://devmanual.gentoo.org/ Abstract ======== @@ -109,11 +111,14 @@ involved? Here are the arguments for enduring the pain involved: effect, though, is that it is rare for ``x86`` packages to be stabled in the context of a full ``x86`` tree, so the big picture of a stable *system*, not just a stable package, is lost. This approach of stabling - in the context of a full stable ``arch`` tree, it has been argued_, is - the fundamental reason why the non-x86 archs have notably better QA + in the context of a full stable ``arch`` tree, it has been argued [#OC]_, + is the fundamental reason why the non-x86 archs have notably better QA than does the x86 arch. -.. _argued: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/30369 +.. [#OC] Olivier Crête. "imlate x86 Editon and more x86 fun". + gentoo-dev mailing list, 2005-08-12, + Message-ID 1123816517.8746.18.camel\@TesterBox.tester.ca, + https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/a072950ff62e9a5ddb791c88a2aca377 Implementation ============== @@ -125,8 +130,8 @@ existing x86 devs to go along with it. Alternative Ideas ================= -Stuart_ has suggested the creation of a new arch keyword: "[-]maint", which -would exist in tandem with the normal arch keywords, thereby making the +Stuart [#SH]_ has suggested the creation of a new arch keyword: "[-]maint", +which would exist in tandem with the normal arch keywords, thereby making the package maintainer's intention explicit. Ciaranm has responded that by definition a package in ``~arch`` is a candidate for ``arch``, so a package's mere presence in the tree (without being in ``package.mask``) should indicate @@ -146,7 +151,10 @@ to override a package maintainer when it comes to stabling a package. Stuart has asserted that in those cases the arch team should be willing to take on the support burden for that package. -.. _Stuart: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/31060 +.. [#SH] Stuart Herbert. "Re: tentative x86 arch team glep". + gentoo-dev mailing list, 2005-09-04, + Message-ID 1125863332.11366.89.camel\@mogheiden.gnqs.org, + https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/d0c5ea28545059d9d5d0b27bdf778fa5 Backwards Compatibility ======================= |