| 1 |
On Tuesday 03 November 2009 18:03:20 Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
> Find below a proposed agenda for our next meeting. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
I'd like council to discuss what I consider a major bug in PMS - |
| 5 |
see the discussion at |
| 6 |
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-pms/msg_95a13d880eb521b13d7090f30350c26a.xml |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Since the PMS / QA ppl seemingly don't have the authority to decide it needs |
| 9 |
to be deferred to council as far as I can tell. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Short version, PMS mandates bash 3.0, eclasses use 3.2 features (e.g. += |
| 12 |
assignment). No 3.0 ebuild is in the tree anymore, so the PMS requirement is |
| 13 |
quite silly. |
| 14 |
Practically the tree has grown beyond what PMS defines (and done so for about |
| 15 |
a year now with eclasses and ebuilds "violating" PMS with noone caring). |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I would appreciate a resolution to this issue, preferably one that doesn't |
| 18 |
kill half our eclasses. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Thanks, |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Patrick |
Archives