| 1 |
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 16:22 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: |
| 2 |
> Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way |
| 3 |
> I ever seen. |
| 4 |
> Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt, |
| 5 |
> pam_smb in net-misc and so on. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I think we should reorganize them and have a sys-pam category with |
| 8 |
> implementations (Linux-PAM and OpenPAM) and the modules needed. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Such a change would require a lot of work and we can't count on epkgmove I |
| 11 |
> think, but if someone is going to help me or at least tell me how to do such |
| 12 |
> a change without breaking everything (always if such a change is accepted, |
| 13 |
> obv.).. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Comments? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Diego: |
| 18 |
This is not directed at you solely but expresses my general feelings on |
| 19 |
the topic of ever moving packages. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I think they are fine where they are. Moving stuff around is a waste of |
| 22 |
time. Makes things more complex. Makes more work on everybody. |
| 23 |
Invalidates binary package trees. It places stress on rsync servers. It |
| 24 |
makes people have to rewrite rsync_exclude files. Makes it harder for |
| 25 |
scripts that interact with portage. And in the end really gains us next |
| 26 |
to nothing. Please stop moving stuff around for cosmetic reasons. I see |
| 27 |
far to many threads about changing stuff. No real valuable work ever |
| 28 |
gets done. Stuff simply just gets shifted around somebody can think of a |
| 29 |
new way to categorize existing data. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives