| 1 |
On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 02:08:48 -0700 |
| 2 |
Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Actually pkgcore folk have pushed for stuff. mtime preservation is a |
| 4 |
> simple example of things I've pushed for- at the time implemented by |
| 5 |
> portage/pkgcore, eliminates the orphan potential for .pyc and other |
| 6 |
> generated files (iow, very useful). |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
The mtime preservation implemented by (recent -- earlier versions |
| 9 |
mirror what Paludis still does) Portage versions has problems that |
| 10 |
you're fully aware of. We're looking at fixing it properly, including |
| 11 |
addressing the problems you're trying to brush under the carpet, for |
| 12 |
EAPI 4 rather than EAPI 3 simply because the Council chose to freeze |
| 13 |
EAPI 3 before a full solution had been proposed. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> My personal opinion on what goes into PMS is that it's typically only |
| 16 |
> stuff that paludis supports already (or is a direction paludis wants |
| 17 |
> to go towards). Could be wrong, but that's my opinion of it via |
| 18 |
> watching/involvement in it from it's public inception. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Er, not in the least bit. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Out of the 7 features in EAPI 2: |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
* One was a last minute workaround for a Portage behaviour change that |
| 25 |
broke things. |
| 26 |
* Five were feature requests from Gentoo developers. |
| 27 |
* One was a response concocted by Paludis people in response to a |
| 28 |
common problem described by Gentoo developers. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Out of the 18 features in EAPI 3: |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
* 14 were feature requests from Gentoo developers. |
| 33 |
* 1.5 were directly from Portage. |
| 34 |
* 1.5 were technicalities worked out based upon real world testing of |
| 35 |
proposed features by Paludis people. |
| 36 |
* One was a colaboration between the Portage and Paludis people. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Paludis had support for nine of these beforehand. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
> In terms of involvement in PMS, frankly it's not worth it from where |
| 41 |
> I'm sitting due to ciarans behaviour. Simplest explanation possible |
| 42 |
> there is that w/ ciaran being effectively the loudest voice PMS wise, |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
...because I do most of the work, and I'm not interested in spending |
| 45 |
weeks discussing proposals I think are a really bad idea with the |
| 46 |
Council. There's nothing to stop you from doing that if you believe |
| 47 |
something should be in an EAPI -- you're welcome to champion your own |
| 48 |
feature requests. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Also, I'll remind you that our current "rejected patches" list is |
| 51 |
sitting at approximately one item... |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
> combined w/ behaviour involving sitting on bugs in competing managers |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
I've given up looking at pkgcore's code or trying to test it. The only |
| 56 |
bugs I'm aware of in pkgcore are those that've been reported by other |
| 57 |
people. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
-- |
| 60 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives