| 1 |
On Sat, 16 May 2009 11:28:57 +0530 |
| 2 |
Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Why do we let utterly *useless* discussions eat into our precious |
| 4 |
> developer time? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Why is it that this thread has 500 replies |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Because the way Gentoo works, any objection to a proposal, valid or not, |
| 9 |
whether or not it's already been addressed, has to be answered before a |
| 10 |
proposal gets anywhere. Thus, every time people post nonsense about |
| 11 |
GLEP 55, every post has to be answered or the Council goes "there are |
| 12 |
unanswered objection, so we'll postpone it". |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> but Mart's maintainer-wanted thread has less than 10? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Because most people either don't care or don't see it leading to |
| 17 |
anything useful. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> I *do not care* if the ebuild format will not be "properly extensible" |
| 20 |
> when the need arises. We'll cross that bridge when we get to it. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
People are already using hacks in the tree to get per package eclasses. |
| 23 |
This is something that should be in EAPI, but can't be. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> Let's not blatantly ignore our REAL problems. We can no longer afford |
| 26 |
> to maintain the status-quo of pedantic masturbatory discussions on the |
| 27 |
> finer points of ebuild formats. We cannot AFFORD to look the other way |
| 28 |
> while the distro rots away. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Part of the reason the distro is rotting away is that isn't delivering |
| 31 |
anything new. I'll remind you that EAPIs 2 and 3 fix several extremely |
| 32 |
major user complaints. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives