Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 49 - take 2

[Brian Harring]

On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 02:59:03PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Monday 22 May 2006 10:47, Thomas Cort wrote:
> > I definitely agree that Gentoo needs a team of people to deal with the
> > primary package manager, it is one of the most important tools in a
> > Linux system. It is especially important in Gentoo where the package
> > manager is, at this point in time, required to install a standard
> > desktop system. I disagree that the package manager needs to be
> > directly maintained by Gentoo. Since Gentoo will never depend upon a
> > piece of non-Free software[1], it is safe to assume that the package
> > manager is Free software (aka open source). Because of this, we will
> > never be locked-in, helpless, or under the control of an external
> > project. If we dislike the direction in which it is going or want to
> > add our own features, then we are free to do so either by submitting
> > patches upstream, adding our own custom gentoo patches to the stock
> > sources, or by forking the project entirely.
> >
<snip>
>
> First of all, I'm in limbo on this. Certainly not dead set against it. If
> this were to be used, I'd like to add the following line: "At least 1 of
> these three must be actively involved in the development of the package
> manager".
>
> Could others please provide input on this question.
>
> Regardless on the decision on this item there is no restriction of
> non-gentoo developers participating in the developement of the package
> manager.

Intention is likely more along the lines of "the format/standards will 
be controlled by gentoo" rather then "primary must be hosted on gentoo 
hardware"- if that's the case, maybe phrase it more along those lines.

~harring