Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Alternative Gentoo package managers discussion request (for the council)
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 22:29:41
Message-Id: 20060517222148.GA30173@dst.grantgoodyear.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Alternative Gentoo package managers discussion request (for the council) by Henrik Brix Andersen
1 Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: [Wed May 17 2006, 04:57:59PM CDT]
2 > Hear, hear. It should be clear to everybody by now that the thread in
3 > question is not going to lead to a solution.
4
5 Actually, I tend to disagree with that sentiment. Sure, it's quite a
6 long thread, but it's also covered a great deal: (a) what are the
7 advantages and disadvantages of such a profile, (b) what such a profile
8 would look like, (c) should an alternative package manager influence the
9 tree before it becomes stable, (d) would bug reports for such an
10 unstable package manager be unduly burdensome, (e) what are the
11 invariants for an alternative package manager, (f) what would be
12 required for an alternative package manager to become a replacement
13 package manager, (g) is it reasonable to have an alternative,
14 potentially replacement, package manager that is not Gentoo-owned, and
15 I'm sure there are others. More importantly, there seem to have been
16 reasonable answers to many of those questions. Also, it seems to me
17 that this thread was moving towards a consensus that most people would
18 like to see paludis mature a bit more before a profile is added, but
19 that if there were clear evidence that paludis wasn't doing any of those
20 things described on the paludis website then many people would, indeed,
21 support a paludis profile in the future. (As an aside, I don't happen
22 to agree with that presumed consensus, as I always thought that keeping
23 the *BSD stuff in an overlay made the barrier to entry too high, and I'd
24 hate to see that mistake repeated.)
25
26 In any event, there's a common knee-jerk reaction that any lengthy
27 thread is, by definition, a "flamewar". Despite the occasionally heated
28 rhetoric, I've seen a lot of valuable content in that thread, and that
29 sort of discussion is certainly not something that I would want to
30 discourage!
31
32 -g2boojum-
33 --
34 Grant Goodyear
35 Gentoo Developer
36 g2boojum@g.o
37 http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
38 GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76