| 1 |
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 02:33:50 +0100 |
| 2 |
Stephen Bennett <spb@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> The first public draft of PMS is open for comment. The PDF is at |
| 4 |
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~spb/pms.pdf |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Open issues that need to be addressed before submission to the Council |
| 7 |
are at [1]. Comments are welcomed, so long as people bear in mind: |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
* PMS isn't the place to push through changes, and it's not an excuse |
| 10 |
for special interest groups to try to sneak in policy. PMS should only |
| 11 |
contradict Portage behaviour where Portage is doing something silly. |
| 12 |
PMS has to consider how things *are*, rather than how things should be. |
| 13 |
If you're looking to get something changed, wait until the EAPI-1 |
| 14 |
discussions that will no doubt take place at some point. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
* PMS doesn't specify coding style issues (this extends to things that |
| 17 |
aren't strictly speaking coding style, such as "package names should be |
| 18 |
all lowercase where possible"). Things like indenting are relevant to |
| 19 |
the devmanual, but have no effect upon a package manager. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
* One issue per bug, one bug per issue, and for the sanity of those of |
| 22 |
us who have to keep track of issues, try to keep feedback on bugzilla. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
For the curious, Paludis non-compliance is being tracked at [2]. So far |
| 25 |
as I'm aware, there's no central list for Portage or Pkgcore |
| 26 |
non-compliance. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
[1] http://tinyurl.com/2z58xn |
| 29 |
[2] http://paludis.pioto.org/trac/query?milestone=PMS+Compliance |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives