Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Preparing profiles for EAPI 3 IUSE strictness
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:04:51
Message-Id: 8b4c83ad0907070704q65a76103wdf77c08e238b7869@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Preparing profiles for EAPI 3 IUSE strictness by Ciaran McCreesh
1 I don't see the point for this reply seeing that Andrew admitted he
2 was in error half-an-hour ago in this very thread.
3
4 On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Ciaran
5 McCreesh<ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote:
6 > On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:08:01 -0400
7 > Andrew D Kirch <trelane@×××××××.net> wrote:
8 >> I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use the EAPI's (or
9 >> PMS) in the first place.
10 >
11 > If that were true, which it isn't, then by Council decision pkgcore
12 > should have been package.masked.
13 >
14 >> This essentially leaves you writing documents you're requiring for
15 >> paludis support.
16 >
17 > No, it leaves me writing documents used by Portage, Pkgcore, Paludis
18 > and at least two more independent under-development third party package
19 > management libraries.
20 >
21 >> As this seems to be mostly a PM issue, it should be taken elsewhere.
22 >
23 > This thread is necessary for Portage support for EAPI 3, which is being
24 > worked on. It also has considerable developer impact, since depending
25 > upon the decisions made, certain existing conventions may no longer
26 > apply to EAPI 3 things.
27 >
28 > Given that your stated intention is for "Paludis to fail", and that
29 > "opposing [me] and everything [I] do was an initiative [you] started
30 > only after careful consideration", I'll kindly ask you to stop randomly
31 > jumping out and flinging turds, since it adds nothing to the discussion
32 > at hand and only serves to make it harder for Gentoo to function as a
33 > community.
34 >
35 > --
36 > Ciaran McCreesh
37 >
38
39
40
41 --
42 ~Nirbheek Chauhan