Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Igor <lanthruster@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 16:58:47
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge by Kent Fredric
1 Kent,
3 Friday, August 8, 2014, 7:51:22 PM, you wrote:
6 There's no way to communicate to a user what you will and will not do with the software, so its impossible to know what flaws you will and won't encounter, so the dependencies thus declare a minimum for expected working behaviour for *all* a software's functionality, not just your user-specific subset.
9 Maintainers have no feedback from their ebuilds, they all do their best but there are no tools
10 to formalize their work. No compass. They have no access to user
11 space where the packages are installed, unaware how users are using their ebuilds. It's the design
12 failure that hunts Gentoo from the start - no global intellectual bug tracking system. Doing not mistakes
13 - not possible, the automated tracking sub-systems should be there but... we are where we are.
15 If the first portage had the stats in any shape Gentoo would be better now. A year ago I wanted to program it
16 but I was in a very huge project that I'm still coding :-((( it's life or death project for me and I can't
17 move out of it or I will sleep on a street.
19 I appreciate all the work everyone is done on Gentoo in free time and I appreciate even more that you really found
20 that time in this world and this life not saying but really doing. It's my best system and I only hope that someday
21 I would be able to contribute to it as many of you did.
25 If you wish to override that decision, you may, but your self-supporting from that point on.
28 TL;DR = just because it works /for you/, doesn't mean it /isn't broken/ and doesn't mean the minimum declaration is "unnecessary" for all users.
31 Agree.
33 --
34 Best regards,
35 Igor mailto:lanthruster@×××××.com


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com>