| 1 |
On Sat, 03 Mar 2007 02:20:48 -0500 Chris Gianelloni |
| 2 |
<wolf31o2@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 06:37 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Nor are most Gentoo projects controlled by Gentoo. Try asking for a |
| 5 |
> > new feature in Portage sometime if you think that Gentoo has any |
| 6 |
> > say over how projects are developed... |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Uhh... |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Bug #167667 |
| 11 |
> Bug #167668 |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Just because the features that you ask for aren't done, don't mean |
| 14 |
> features aren't added on request. Sure, my feature requests are much |
| 15 |
> simpler than "add some new ability to dependency resolution" to |
| 16 |
> implement, but they prove the point that no matter how much bitching |
| 17 |
> and whining people do, the portage team *is* responsive and does fill |
| 18 |
> requests in a timely manner. It's even easier if you provide patches. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
No, they fill *some* requests in a timely manner, whilst ignoring many |
| 21 |
things that the tree, developers and users really need. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> The EAPI=0 document was supposed to be a QA project. What it is now, |
| 24 |
> I have no idea. While the current PMS project is not what we asked |
| 25 |
> for and *is* outside the scope of Gentoo, due to our wishing to still |
| 26 |
> *have* a specification of EAPI=0, we are wanting to look at other |
| 27 |
> possibilities for getting one done. What the Council is interested |
| 28 |
> in is a specification of expected behavior of an EAPI=0 compatible |
| 29 |
> package manager. At this point, I don't give a damn who writes it or |
| 30 |
> what implementation, if any, matches it 100%. I am pretty sure it'll |
| 31 |
> be *very* close to current portage functionality, side-effects and |
| 32 |
> bugs excluded, of course. We asked for a specification. If the PMS |
| 33 |
> team is unable or unwilling to provide us with what we asked under |
| 34 |
> the terms we asked for it, we're going to pursue other options. We |
| 35 |
> can't control PMS< but we also don't have to sit around and do |
| 36 |
> nothing to reach the Council's goal of an approved specification for |
| 37 |
> EAPI=0, a goal which I believe some people lost sight of some time |
| 38 |
> ago. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
A specification that no-one follows or that is full of inaccuracies is |
| 41 |
worthless. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
| 45 |
Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org |
| 46 |
Web : http://ciaranm.org/ |
| 47 |
Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ |
Archives