| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Seemant Kulleen wrote: |
| 5 |
>> I wasn't indicating that a "popularity" contest should be held, |
| 6 |
>> because I trust the developers will cast their vote only after |
| 7 |
>> *technically* evaluating the options. I also don't think it's fair |
| 8 |
>> for a small minority of developers to make the switch on behalf of |
| 9 |
>> the rest of us, which is why I mentioned a number like "50%". An |
| 10 |
>> election is not always political ;) |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> See above: not every developer is technically capable of evaluating the |
| 13 |
> underpinnings of the tools we use. For most of us, those underpinnings |
| 14 |
> do not matter. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
True, and the underpinnings are not the only reason to switch. Should be |
| 17 |
also the user experience (speed, features) and that can be evaluated by |
| 18 |
every dev, or even users - it's what matters most for them, isn't it. Of |
| 19 |
course internal design is important for maintainability etc, but it's |
| 20 |
not all. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> It's probably a little early to initiate such a proposal, seeing as the |
| 23 |
> PMS is still undergoing review. Why don't we just let the current |
| 24 |
> course of events continue, instead of trying to force any specific |
| 25 |
> issue? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Yeah, I don't think it's now helpful to hear that portage sux and |
| 28 |
paludis can do $x and $y and $z, over and over again. Someone's little |
| 29 |
too early for an election campaign? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
- -- |
| 32 |
Vlastimil Babka (Caster) |
| 33 |
Gentoo/Java |
| 34 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 35 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) |
| 36 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
iD8DBQFGDKyhtbrAj05h3oQRAireAJ9c/9J0opR6X+IKKkQQHZHbqvO5wACfbjPn |
| 39 |
97vZFLm5eFsdW23AHGW04uM= |
| 40 |
=WEo/ |
| 41 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives