Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Please don't turn this into a pissing match. (was: pkg_pretend USE validation and VALID_USE alternative)
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:23:19
1 I don't want to point fingers in any one direction, so I'm replying to
2 the initial mail in this thread.
4 On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com> wrote:
5 [snip proposition]
7 Improvements in this direction are indeed needed, but I would really
8 like it if the volatile mix of paludis/pkgcore developers would not
9 explode all over the mailing list. Please don't let the discussions
10 get personal. The past is the past, don't insert indirect references
11 to it and heat up the discussion.
13 On a related note, I really like Zac's and solar's no-nonsense
14 get-stuff-done-even-if-it-isn't-perfect attitude, and would love it if
15 everyone else applied it as well (if they don't already). I don't care
16 if the proposal is perfect; as a potential user of those features, I
17 want it to be implemented in portage in a reasonable time-frame.
19 Over-engineering and then designing something to death is not the way
20 to deliver said feature to the user. It's really stupid when the
21 design document gets more attention than the implementation used by
22 90% of our users.
24 Also, what I'm about to say next may make your blood boil, but tbh,
25 most of our users do not care about any package manager besides
26 portage. If a feature cannot be delivered to portage users in a
27 reasonable time-frame, it's useless. Either fix your design so it can
28 be implemented in portage, or fix portage so your design can be
29 implemented in it. Your choice. Don't say "Oh, use XXX package
30 manager".
32 Thank you for reading!
34 --
35 ~Nirbheek Chauhan
37 Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team