| 1 |
On čtvrtek 08 Říjen 2009, 23:34:10 Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 2 |
> Even this is wrong because: |
| 3 |
Hi |
| 4 |
... |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> betelgeuse@pena ~ $ portageq metadata / ebuild sys-libs/glibc-2.2.5-r10 |
| 7 |
> IUSE nls |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> For most packages old versions are not kept around so just doing |
| 10 |
> >=cat/foo-X.Y[use] is fine and EAPI 3 is not needed. I haven't come |
| 11 |
> across a case that couldn't be done with EAPI 2 yet. Granted the atoms |
| 12 |
> can be a bit cleaner with EAPI 3 but considering how much zmedico slacks |
| 13 |
> in implementing it, it's best to do migrating now with EAPI 2 than EAPI |
| 14 |
> 3 in the far future. |
| 15 |
This is not exactly nice of you. And taking in account that you are actualy |
| 16 |
the council member it makes me feel not entirely happy. |
| 17 |
If we just simply take look onto this: |
| 18 |
http://cia.vc/stats/author/zmedico/ |
| 19 |
we can count that Zac commit something into portage every 3 hours. It does not |
| 20 |
look entirely like slacking... |
| 21 |
So you are basicaly proposing that maintaining the current codebase and |
| 22 |
improving what we already have is less important than providing new features, |
| 23 |
that is also not good. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Just my 2 cents |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Tomas |
Archives