On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
<ciaran.mccreesh@...> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 15:22:19 -0700
> Brian Harring <ferringb@...> wrote:
>> So where exactly is this "sky is falling" issue you're worried
>> about? Bugs happen.
>
> It means anyone using EAPI 2 now is going to encounter severe
> breakages with Pkgcore. Simply put, all your Pkgcore users are going to
> get screwed over very messily as soon as they try to use any EAPI 2
> things. Is this not something we should be caring about?

I think everyone appreciates the forewarning (even if not everyone
appreciates the manner in which it was delivered).  I think we do care
and we are fixing it.  I believe the developers of said packages have
a different idea of the risks involved than you and I don't expect
everyone to agree on specific software development or release
processes.

>
>> Frankly you're overreacting on this- and that is assuming you *are*
>> overreacting instead of just going for a bit of a public smear
>> via bugs.
>
> Bah. If you want me to lecture you on how you're being blatantly
> irresponsible and incompetent then I will do, although by the way you
> rush on the defensive and start trying to cover your ass by throwing
> accusations at me it looks like you already know it. But what I care
> about is getting the mess fixed in the most painless way possible.
>
> This is a real issue and developers need to know the implications.
>

If you want to call people names do it on your own lists.

>> Either way, my vote is fix the bugs, leave EAPI2 as is, and in the
>> future kindly file bugs properly (preferably w/out the noise, but
>> I'll take usable bug reports in almost any form).
>
> If you want bug reports via trac instead of IRC, get your trac to
> respond faster.
>
> --
> Ciaran McCreesh
>