| 1 |
Dnia 2013-06-25, o godz. 00:27:55 |
| 2 |
hasufell <hasufell@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 06/24/2013 12:59 AM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: |
| 5 |
> > The dev manual doesn't believe this is implicit nor without any |
| 6 |
> > consensus. True, it doesn't ban you from adding a new eclass, but it |
| 7 |
> > doesn't say you can just go and randomly add new eclasses without |
| 8 |
> > discussion either. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I know the devmanual quite well. The example in it's procedure was a bit |
| 11 |
> more complex than you are describing, so I don't see how that adds anything. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> People agreed that the eclass is fine, but there was no real consensus |
| 14 |
> about the question whether we actually want an eclass based solution. |
| 15 |
> You can't have both, because it does not make sense. At one point you |
| 16 |
> have to decide, council did nothing to aid in this heated (really |
| 17 |
> heated) discussion. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Wasn't there? I can think of the two people being really unhappy with |
| 20 |
it (guess why), a few more being unsure or indifferent. You can't get |
| 21 |
all the people to be happy. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I'm really sorry that you're unhappy with the solution we've put our |
| 24 |
work into. But I'd really appreciate if you two stopped undermining it, |
| 25 |
'spreading FUD' and accepted the fact that -- even if the eclass-based |
| 26 |
solution didn't get a 'real consensus' -- yours wouldn't get even that |
| 27 |
close to it. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
And I'm sad that you can't keep it professional. I'm doing my best to |
| 30 |
help you with multilib-portage. It's an out-of-tree project which is |
| 31 |
not officially supported, yet I hack the eclass to keep it working. |
| 32 |
And I don't get anything for it, really, just more blustering |
| 33 |
[dictionary translation, meaning may have been lost]. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
That said, I don't know what the Council could or should do. Should |
| 36 |
the Council be responsible for reading discussions and grabbing whether |
| 37 |
there was a consensus or not? Or making one in the name of the whole |
| 38 |
community? |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Last but not least, I don't even know if there were *two* solutions |
| 41 |
proposed. It seems a bit like it's between *a working solution now*, |
| 42 |
and not doing anything and waiting till you get it anywhere near |
| 43 |
official acceptance. Note that the timeframe and willingness of people |
| 44 |
to work on it is an important point as well. And likeliness that |
| 45 |
everything breaks apart when people touch multilib.eclass. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
Best regards, |
| 49 |
Michał Górny |
Archives