Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Josh Saddler <nightmorph@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2007 09:57:13
Message-Id: 45E945D6.3090403@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting by Ciaran McCreesh
1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
2 > (Pkgcore is in parts based upon Portage code -- whether or not this is
3 > a good thing is irrelevant to this discussion)
4
5 Nice way of adding in that little "cover my ass so's I can snipe at a
6 competing project" parenthetical statement.
7
8 That statement is in itself irrelevant to the discussion; we're not
9 talking about pkgcore, nor about its *code base* -- and you know very
10 well that only trivial bits are still Portage code.
11
12 Meanwhile, back to the issue at hand...I suppose a deadline of any sort
13 should spell out what expectations folks have for the initial drafts;
14 that is, what they intend to do once they get it in their hot little
15 hands that justifies any time crunch. Then again, deadline itself seems
16 to be a word with negative connotations -- are folks wanting to get into
17 the drafts before some future release of Portage, or what? Or are they
18 just antsy because no one besides those working on it have any idea of
19 percent completed? I suppose a status report would be more in order than
20 a deadline. Having said report would better facilitate deciding a
21 deadline & its date anyway.
22
23 To this point, the most report that anyone seems to have is more of the
24 ol' smoke and mirrors: "the right people have access to it, and we can
25 give you read-only access if you're OUR sort of people."

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org>