Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 20:57:13
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis by Ciaran McCreesh
1 On Friday 30 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
2 > Gentoo's lack of progress is an extremely relevant issue...
4 dont push your own agendas under the guise that Gentoo is lacking progress
6 > > to start with, Paludis will never be an official package manager for
7 > > Gentoo so long as you are heavily involved. now that we've put a
8 > > bolt right between the eyes of that pink elephant, how about we
9 > > address some other things as well ...
10 >
11 > Ah, resorting to ad hominem. Is that the best you can manage? Is the
12 > best excuse you can provide to users for denying them the things they
13 > want and need "waah! ciaranm boogeyman!"?
15 not really, why dont you apply some of your logic:
16 - you are not wanted as an official Gentoo developer ... the past clearly
17 shows this
18 - the official package manager of Gentoo would need to be
19 completely "in-house" with respect to control, direction, etc...
20 - "in-house" would require every one who is control of the package manager to
21 be a Gentoo developer
22 - in order for you to gain again, we'd need either a complete
23 flush of developer blood who would accept you or you to change yourself ...
24 neither of which are realistic
26 so let's put this all together shall we:
27 you are in full control of paludis, you will not be a Gentoo developer,
28 thereforce paludis will not be the official Gentoo package manager
30 > No no, I'd be quite happy with any package manager that meets my needs
31 > and the needs of other people. Portage is not such a package manager,
32 > and, let's face it, never will be. The continuing delusion that Portage
33 > will somehow magically improve and allow Gentoo to keep up with other
34 > distributions is largely why Gentoo is stuck where it is.
36 there's a magic pill if i ever saw one ... the only available package managers
37 at the moment that satisfy your requirements is paludis ... therefore see
38 previous statements
40 > > a good topic for the next council meeting i think would be to start
41 > > up a spec of requirements that a package manager must satisfy before
42 > > it'd be an official package manager for Gentoo ... off the top of my
43 > > head:
44 > > - the main developers need to be Gentoo developers
45 > > - source code hosted on Gentoo infrastructure
46 > > - compatible "emerge" and "ebuild" binaries
47 >
48 > As you know fine well, the Council has already rejected GLEP 49, which
49 > says more or less that.
51 actually, no, GLEP 49 covers a ton more than what i'm proposing
53 > As you also know fine well, those requirements
54 > mean Gentoo will permanently be stuck with Portage (and when dreaming
55 > up silly and biased requirements, bear in mind that Portage was at one
56 > point close to being moved off Gentoo infrastructure because of the huge
57 > delays in setting up svn...).
59 again, wrong ... read what i said, my requirements would control selection of
60 an official package manager and in fact are quite general and dont really
61 come with restrictions as you seem to think
63 "emerge" is a brand name for Gentoo and while you can complain about lack of
64 features all you want, dropping portage and installing a different package
65 manager with a completely different interface will surely causes a huge pita
66 for everyone
68 nowhere did i say the behavior of portage needs to be retained by a package
69 manager ... i was suggesting that any official Gentoo package manager would
70 have a way for users to continue with the general feel of things so that
71 people can do `emerge foo` and know that the package "foo" would be
72 installed. package managers are free to emulate this however they want and
73 provide whatever other main binary they want.
74 -mike


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org>
Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis Anant Narayanan <anant@g.o>