Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Seemant Kulleen <seemant@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:01:45
Message-Id: 1175216337.5967.7.camel@localhost
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis by Anant Narayanan
1 On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 03:07 +0530, Anant Narayanan wrote:
2 > Sure it's not ideal and I acknowledge that. But portage is tied very
3 > closely to Gentoo for historical reasons, and it is not reasonable to
4 > expect an alternate package manager to replace it (not in the near
5 > future atleast).
7 Historical reasons aren't necessarily the correct reasons. I'd almost
8 say that your sentence has officially heralded the age of Debianisation.
10 > How about implementing the features you mention in
11 > portage? I know what your response would be though: portage is too
12 > much "spaghetti" code to even think about it.
14 Have you ever tried to add features to a frankenstein of a beast? What
15 is the value to you in doing something like that? Isn't there more
16 value in designing something based on what you've learned instead? We
17 can all go all day about this and not convince each other, so please
18 let's just drop this line of thinking.
21 > But guess what, if you
22 > do succeed in making a patch that adds a feature to portage, it'll be
23 > accepted faster than you think. Maybe, given the current situation,
24 > that is the best way to provide a "better experience" to the users
25 > you are so worried about; atleast for those users who don't want to
26 > try out package managers unsupported by Gentoo.
28 What are you basing any of this on? Sounds like speculation that
29 doesn't help anything.
32 > You are comparing Gentoo with the wrong distributions. Both Ubuntu
33 > and Fedora have people working on it 24x7, and they are being *paid*
34 > to do so. Gentoo is a community distribution which is entirely
35 > volunteer driven, and you can't expect it to match with the pace of
36 > commercial distributions such as the ones you mention. Debian is a
37 > distro you could compare with, and you'll have to accept the fact
38 > that they develop *for* the developers, much like Gentoo.
40 Debian was never a distro that I thought we'd emulate, or should
41 emulate. Turns out I was wrong, I suppose.
44 > So, really, I don't care if Ubuntu becomes more popular than Gentoo.
45 > Isn't it already?!
47 Here we agree. I don't think Ciaran is arguing popularity either. He's
48 arguing that the compelling case for using Gentoo is what's fading.
49 There's a difference.
52 > Point is, the day when more than 50% of the devs feel we need a new
53 > package manager, will be the day a replacement will be made.
55 I'm not entirely sure on your reasons for this statement. If
56 developers' don't face any API changes, why should we have to have a
57 political vote on which package manager gets dubbed the one true
58 official one? Why should it be a popularity contest? Why can it not be
59 a technical superiority issue? If there is a compelling set of
60 technical reasons to replace portage, why ignore that set?
62 Portage is more than the package manager. Its life comes from the
63 portage _tree_. Portage is just the tool that is used to use that tree.
64 If that tool is outdated (and let's be honest, it kind of is), then
65 switching it is not actually a bad thing.
67 In sum, I'm not sure I like this direction of basing technical things on
68 political decisions.
70 Thanks,
72 Seemant


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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis Anant Narayanan <anant@g.o>