| 1 |
On Monday 22 May 2006 18:30, Chris Bainbridge wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 22/05/06, Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > There are serious costs involved with forking something. For gentoo this |
| 4 |
> > would include image problems by being seen as "evil" forkers. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Surely such decisions should be based on technical merit, and not |
| 7 |
> political? The technical cost of forking is small. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Only if we have people actively working with the code. Otherwise we need |
| 10 |
people to get to know the code first. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning - other distros can have |
| 13 |
> external package managers because their users have less freedom? Are |
| 14 |
> you concerned about the political effect of there being less to |
| 15 |
> distinguish Gentoo from clones, or the fact that an external package |
| 16 |
> manager might somehow seek to limit users freedom to determine |
| 17 |
> configurations? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
What I meant to say is that even if it ok for binary distributions to have |
| 20 |
external package managers, this can not be taken one-to-one for gentoo. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Paul |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 26 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 27 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 28 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives