Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
Cc: Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o>, gentoo-pms@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] tree-layout.tex small cleanup
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 22:54:44
Message-Id: 20090919235438.03b1a374@snowmobile
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-pms] tree-layout.tex small cleanup by Ulrich Mueller
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 00:43:35 +0200
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > But it was an official Gentoo project, [...] > > The 2008-04-10 council summary says something different: > > # The council voted that kdebuild-1 and other unapproved EAPIs could > # not be in an approved PMS document. The spec isn't a place for > # proposals or things that will never be submitted for approval by the > # council. It's a specification, a reference of what is allowed in the > # main tree.
Please point to where the Council said that the Gentoo KDE project wasn't an official Gentoo project.
> So, really no need to discuss it further.
Sure there is. Let's look at what happens if you remove it: * It makes it harder for package manager authors to deal with things that were delivered by an official Gentoo project. * It makes doing future EAPIs more work, since we'll almost certainly end up rewriting things that we'd be taking out. As much as you might like to rewrite history to pretend it never existed, the fact is, kdebuild-1 did exist and we're better off acknowledging that. -- Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-pms] tree-layout.tex small cleanup Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o>