| 1 |
On Monday 01 October 2001 19:17, you wrote: |
| 2 |
> If what drobbins really mean is that Dan should be doing this job alone |
| 3 |
> without any help from other developers, then I strongly disagree. |
| 4 |
I understood him to mean that developers could elp me in testing and |
| 5 |
developin, but that they couldn't use eclasses in their routine gentoo work |
| 6 |
because we don't know yet if or when or in what fom eclasses will be made a |
| 7 |
part of gentoo proper. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> If on the other hand, drobbins' argument is against Dan seemingly |
| 10 |
> recruiting any and all, or newcomers to Gentoo, then I understand it a bit |
| 11 |
> more. While I still think Dan should be entitled to recruit the help of |
| 12 |
> any of the other Gentoo developers, Dan should perhaps have handled things |
| 13 |
> a bit differently and required that Verwilst sent the eclass-based ebuilds |
| 14 |
> directly to himself instead checking it into CVS. |
| 15 |
They are masked while in cvs. I think that's generally enough protection. It' |
| 16 |
much more comfortable than mailing files to one another. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> On a more practical note, I really think major changes like this chould be |
| 19 |
> done on CVS branches, so that we can afford doing really heavy changes |
| 20 |
> without fear of troubling our users. |
| 21 |
I second that. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Dan Armak |
| 26 |
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop Team |
| 27 |
Matan, Israel |
Archives