Archives
Archives
| From: | Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: location of portage tree | ||
| Date: | Wed, 28 Mar 2012 14:51:26 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20120328154903.08cc2331@googlemail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: location of portage tree by Richard Yao |
||
| 1 | On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 10:42:26 -0400 |
| 2 | Richard Yao <ryao@×××××××××××××.edu> wrote: |
| 3 | > The general sentiment that I have seen from Gentoo developers on IRC |
| 4 | > is that overlays are bad and that they are meant for things that will |
| 5 | > eventually be merged into the main tree. |
| 6 | |
| 7 | What they should really be saying is that Portage is bad at overlays |
| 8 | but the Summer of Code projects to fix it will solve all of that this |
| 9 | time around, honest. |
| 10 | |
| 11 | -- |
| 12 | Ciaran McCreesh |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |