| 1 |
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 08:27:39 +0000 (UTC) |
| 2 |
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
> The problem right now is that while you are correct, that's the |
| 4 |
> official list, due to technical/political issues, the Gentoo-official |
| 5 |
> PMS repo doesn't (or didn't as of the last council meeting, according |
| 6 |
> to the log) have any EAPI-1 info at all, as it's currently outdated, |
| 7 |
> with the work all going into the off-Gentoo repo. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
No no. The 'Gentoo-official' repo doesn't have any EAPI-1 info at all |
| 10 |
because whoever's supposed to have set up the 'Gentoo-official' repo |
| 11 |
hasn't bothered to tell any of the people doing the committing a) where |
| 12 |
the repo is or how to commit to it, b) what the technical reasons for |
| 13 |
moving away from the current repo are or c) who all has root on the box |
| 14 |
upon which the repo is hosted. Even if any of the PMS contributors |
| 15 |
*wanted* to commit to an official Gentoo repository, they couldn't |
| 16 |
because neither the Council nor whoever did the setting up have |
| 17 |
bothered to tell them about it. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> (Apparently, there aren't any official Gentoo devs working on PMS |
| 20 |
> ATM. =8^( Did I mention political issues in addition to technical |
| 21 |
> ones?) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
So far as I'm aware, spb is still technically an official Gentoo |
| 24 |
developer. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives