| 1 |
On 4/20/20 2:58 PM, Patrick McLean wrote: |
| 2 |
>> |
| 3 |
>> You keep saying that, but the fact that dev-go/* is filled with trash |
| 4 |
>> that has your name on it prevents anyone else from doing a better job. |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
> Ad-hominen attacks are unwarranted, please refrain from them. I challenge you to find *anything* in dev-go/* with my name on it. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
You quoted me one sentence prior saying that it's the Go ebuilds that |
| 9 |
are trash and not anyone personally. But OK, I should have said "Sony |
| 10 |
Interactive Entertainment" there instead of "you." |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> Are you volunteering to do the work to package go packages? The people doing the work generally get to decide how that work gets done, and which approach they would like to take. The upstream situation makes it very labour-intensive to do the work in a the way you are proposing (many packages would end up with hundreds to thousands of packages in the tree). Separating everything out in to separate packages will just increase the maintenance load exponentially, with no gains as go upstreams version lock all their dependencies. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I'm volunteering to work on one or two small Go packages. Can I convert |
| 17 |
the eclass to use dynamic linking? Can I start replacing your packages |
| 18 |
with my own if I need them as dependencies? I suspect not, and that's |
| 19 |
one of many reasons why "having things in ::gentoo does not affect |
| 20 |
anyone who does not use them" is bullshit. |
Archives