1 |
Philipp Riegger <lists@××××××××××××.de> posted |
2 |
1243335643.9661.46.camel@×××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××.de, excerpted |
3 |
below, on Tue, 26 May 2009 13:00:43 +0200: |
4 |
|
5 |
> Bit it seems to be quite an uninteresting topic, since the people most |
6 |
> affected by it (Gentoo developers) did not join the conversation, yet. |
7 |
> Maybe I should take this to gentoo-server@ and gentoo-portage@, it might |
8 |
> fit there. |
9 |
|
10 |
Agreed on the participation observation and taking it elsewhere, both. |
11 |
I'd think the gentoo-portage-dev list (which I also read) would be a good |
12 |
place for hopefully more discussion, with people actually interested. I |
13 |
still think it's likely better, at least at first, as a separate "helper" |
14 |
app, but a number of such helpers have ultimately been integrated into |
15 |
either portage itself, or into gentoolkit over time. |
16 |
|
17 |
Also, by doing it that way rather than by trying to change Gentoo as a |
18 |
whole, you avoid the prospect of /years/ of debate that has occurred over |
19 |
GLEP55 and with it 54, which also set about to change the package naming |
20 |
conventions, in this case for ebuilds. And given that PMS specifically |
21 |
defines binary package formats as out of its domain, I really do see that |
22 |
as the more practical approach... unless of course you /want/ to debate |
23 |
it for /years/ before anything gets done. =:^\ |
24 |
|
25 |
Then as it proves its value, it'll ultimately become the de-facto |
26 |
standard and be integrated into some future version of PMS or whatever. |
27 |
|
28 |
-- |
29 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
30 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
31 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |