Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-pms@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] tree-layout.tex small cleanup
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 23:35:27
Message-Id: 20090920003520.0b93d5e7@snowmobile
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-pms] tree-layout.tex small cleanup by Patrick Lauer
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 01:26:38 +0200
Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote:
> On Sunday 20 September 2009 01:03:41 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 00:48:51 +0200 > > > > Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote: > > > In the same sense package.mask as a directory is officially > > > supported (used by the KDE team, temporarily removed for legacy > > > package managers). > > > > Patrick, if you're going to keep trolling, kindly do so elsewhere. > Well, some facts - > > The KDE overlay used package.mask as a directory. Some users who had > been migrated to paludis in the genkdesvn times complained. The KDE > team decided to remove that nice feature to keep users happy, > progress be damned. And most of the KDE team members wish to re-add > that feature. > > That ain't trolling, that be facts.
The KDE team are more than welcome to re-add it as an EAPI controlled feature, either through EAPI 4 or through EAPI kdebuild-2 as they prefer. There's a huge difference between doing something as a published standard and doing something that violates a published standard.
> > Your response [1] to the rejection of your bash version patch > I fail to see what my blog has to do with discussing PMS and this > mailinglist. Please stop confusing things by trying to throw in > random unrelated things until people walk away in frustration and you > win by being the bigger idiot.
You had a patch rejected that the PMS team has no authority to accept, and were told how to raise the issue with the appropriate authorities to get the change you requested made. Rather than doing so, you decided to suggest on your blog that the PMS team were to blame for rejecting it.
> > shows > > that you're not interested in getting your concerns fixed, and are > > instead just trying to stir up trouble. > I would say that documenting the current state of things is quite > relevant to the issue at hand. If you are bothered by facts please > don't try to engage in discussions.
Then why don't you follow the process we told you about for getting it fixed?
> And here something completely unrelated: > <darkside_> bonsaikitten: you know the best part in response to your > blog post is? > <darkside_> bonsaikitten: python.eclass uses "+=" in it, so portage > can't be installed with bash-3.0 ;) > > I couldn't have said it better. Stupid reality not obeying!
Again, why don't you do what we suggested to get the problem fixed? Why do you instead continue to whine about us not changing something we're not allowed to change? -- 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>