1 |
On Thursday 18 May 2006 01:23, Ryan Phillips wrote: |
2 |
> Mike Auty <ikelos@g.o> said: |
3 |
> > Forgive me, |
4 |
> > I'm a little new at this and I really don't want to get involved, |
5 |
> > but since my inbox has seen nothing but this for the past day or two, |
6 |
> > I'm going to ask a few questions I'm interested in the answers to... |
7 |
> > First and foremost is, will adding this to the tree be used for |
8 |
> > function creep, whereby the next request to add to/alter the portage |
9 |
> > tree is backed up by "Well, the profile change was already added to |
10 |
> > the tree"? I wouldn't want a precedent like this set without the |
11 |
> > council reviewing it. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> I really don't see much of an issue of feature creep. Gentoo/ALT |
14 |
> already has a profile. It isn't like there are changes to the actual |
15 |
> ebuilds themselves. |
16 |
|
17 |
This is my main point. I believe that adding the profile now will lead to |
18 |
function creep. Given the stated direction of paludis to be INCOMPATTIBLE |
19 |
with portage, this will eventually lead to either replacing portage or |
20 |
forcing portage into directions that gentoo does not wish to go. |
21 |
|
22 |
> |
23 |
> > Thirdly has anything like this ever happened to Debian or the |
24 |
> > Sourcery group? If so how did they cope with it, and if not, how |
25 |
> > have they avoided it? |
26 |
> |
27 |
> SMGL has voting and things get done. |
28 |
|
29 |
Wrong answer. It does not answer the question. SOURCERY!=SMGL |
30 |
|
31 |
> |
32 |
> > As you may have guessed I'm of the, "You can do the same thing with |
33 |
> > an overlay, so why must it be in the tree". I am however willing to |
34 |
> > wait and see what the council says, why can't the changes to the tree |
35 |
> > wait until then, what is so urgent? I'm especially intrigued since |
36 |
> > all this is simply to no longer require portage as a dependency of |
37 |
> > system. Can't paludis peacefully co-exist with a portage |
38 |
> > installation for a little longer, until it's mature? |
39 |
> |
40 |
> The question is when is it mature? I've tried it and Paludis does |
41 |
> work. There will always be bugs and feature requests. Its part of |
42 |
> the development process. |
43 |
|
44 |
It is mature when I can install it in my gentoo system. Try it out on some |
45 |
ebuilds. Check whether my ebuild is compatible with paludis and portage |
46 |
(in the same system), and not break my system horibly. If only |
47 |
undocumented tricks will allow this this means that paludis is not yet |
48 |
mature. |
49 |
|
50 |
Yes, any package manager that claims to work with ebuilds is only mature |
51 |
when it cooperates in a portage environment. This means that either you |
52 |
cooperate with portage, or you get the portage developers to introduce |
53 |
the things you need into a stable portage. |
54 |
|
55 |
Paul |
56 |
|
57 |
-- |
58 |
Paul de Vrieze |
59 |
Gentoo Developer |
60 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
61 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |