| 1 |
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 23:51:42 -0700 |
| 2 |
"Daniel Robbins" <drobbins.daniel@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Gentoo projects are controlled by and generally run entirely by Gentoo |
| 5 |
> developers. You are not a Gentoo developer, yet you define the |
| 6 |
> direction of PMS and Paludis. Therefore, PMS and Paludis can't be |
| 7 |
> considered official Gentoo projects. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
(I'm picking this mail to respond to in lieu of the entire thread...) |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Paludis is not and never has been a Gentoo project. PMS is a Gentoo |
| 12 |
project with external contributors, and hence can't be hosted on Gentoo |
| 13 |
svn. I define the direction PMS takes, and I control its subversion |
| 14 |
repository; Ciaran just happens to be doing a lot of the actual work |
| 15 |
writing it. There is nothing Paludis specific in it; it defines that |
| 16 |
set of behaviour upon which ebuilds may rely, which is for obvious |
| 17 |
reasons a subset of what Portage currently supports. If Paludis |
| 18 |
supports something that Portage doesn't, then it can't be used in the |
| 19 |
tree and doesn't belong in PMS, at least until Portage grows the |
| 20 |
support and it can be put into a later EAPI revision. The only |
| 21 |
connection between PMS and Paludis is a correlation between the people |
| 22 |
writing each. |
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives