| 1 |
Paul de Vrieze wrote: [Tue Mar 06 2007, 02:27:00PM CST] |
| 2 |
> That remainst to be debateable. It is however also true that he is a party |
| 3 |
> with a vested interest in the process. As such we must be warry of what we |
| 4 |
> allow. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I think you (and many others, including drobbins) have missed something |
| 7 |
important here. I'm noticing an implicit assumption that spb and |
| 8 |
crew are writing The Gentoo EAPI-0 Spec (TM), and that once they're done |
| 9 |
it will be the official document describing the official ebuild spec. |
| 10 |
None of that is actually true, as far as I can tell. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
If I understand the process correctly, spb et al are writing their best |
| 13 |
vision of an ebuild spec, while trying to strike a reasonable |
| 14 |
compromise between what portage does and what it should be doing, but |
| 15 |
once they're done it's going to be submitted to the Council and the |
| 16 |
community to be analyzed, commented upon, and accepted in part, in |
| 17 |
whole, or not at all by the Council. If they take too long, or their |
| 18 |
work is too paludis-biased, or if people just don't trust the authors, |
| 19 |
then nothing is preventing anybody else from writing a competing spec. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-g2boojum- |
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Grant Goodyear |
| 24 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 25 |
g2boojum@g.o |
| 26 |
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum |
| 27 |
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 |
Archives