| 1 |
On Wednesday 17 May 2006 19:38, Thomas Cort wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Isn't discussing if paludis can build ISOs for a bunch of arches a |
| 4 |
> level of indirection? This thread was originally about adding a |
| 5 |
> profile. The profile doesn't affect anyone who doesn't use it, nor does |
| 6 |
> it require any changes to existing ebuilds or profiles. It adds no work |
| 7 |
> for developers who are not interested. The only additional work load |
| 8 |
> would be to bug wranglers for users who file bugs, and this has already |
| 9 |
> been discussed. Can we please get back on topic. Is there a valid |
| 10 |
> technical reason against adding the profile? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
The profile is a step in the process of paludis becomming accepted. |
| 13 |
Besides a profile being unneeded at this point, it is also to early to |
| 14 |
provide this level of support to an alternative package maanger. If the |
| 15 |
profile is accepted at this point, it also means that gentoo has accepted |
| 16 |
paludis in some way. This is a bigger way than just having it in the |
| 17 |
tree. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Paul |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 23 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 24 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 25 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives