I don't see the point for this reply seeing that Andrew admitted he
was in error half-an-hour ago in this very thread.
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Ciaran
> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:08:01 -0400
> Andrew D Kirch <trelane@...> wrote:
>> I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use the EAPI's (or
>> PMS) in the first place.
> If that were true, which it isn't, then by Council decision pkgcore
> should have been package.masked.
>> This essentially leaves you writing documents you're requiring for
>> paludis support.
> No, it leaves me writing documents used by Portage, Pkgcore, Paludis
> and at least two more independent under-development third party package
> management libraries.
>> As this seems to be mostly a PM issue, it should be taken elsewhere.
> This thread is necessary for Portage support for EAPI 3, which is being
> worked on. It also has considerable developer impact, since depending
> upon the decisions made, certain existing conventions may no longer
> apply to EAPI 3 things.
> Given that your stated intention is for "Paludis to fail", and that
> "opposing [me] and everything [I] do was an initiative [you] started
> only after careful consideration", I'll kindly ask you to stop randomly
> jumping out and flinging turds, since it adds nothing to the discussion
> at hand and only serves to make it harder for Gentoo to function as a
> Ciaran McCreesh