| 1 |
On 08/14/2013 10:07 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 21:59:37 +0200 |
| 3 |
> hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> You're fundamentally misunderstanding how PMS and Gentoo development |
| 5 |
>>> works. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> I think you are fundamentally misunderstanding. I think gentoo should |
| 8 |
>> stop supporting downstreams IF supporting them means blocking |
| 9 |
>> progress. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> What's this got to do with anything we're discussing? PMS isn't a |
| 12 |
> "downstream". It's what the Council decided is allowed in the tree. Or |
| 13 |
> are you suggesting the Council is somehow a downstream that is blocking |
| 14 |
> progress? I don't follow what you're implying here. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I can't help you with that. I'm just saying what my opinion as a |
| 17 |
developer is and that I will vote/push into that direction. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
>>>> And their lack of time (to be polite) should not block general |
| 21 |
>>>> progress in gentoo. |
| 22 |
>>> |
| 23 |
>>> |
| 24 |
>>> Perhaps these basic notions of how Gentoo development works |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>> You certainly are not an authority when it comes to that question... |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Well no |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
exactly |
Archives