Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Anant Narayanan <anant@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 04:44:40
Message-Id: 5488404A-B5DC-4DA4-AE9F-18B91AB81A7A@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis by Seemant Kulleen
1 <snip>
2 > See above: not every developer is technically capable of evaluating
3 > the
4 > underpinnings of the tools we use. For most of us, those
5 > underpinnings
6 > do not matter.
7
8 I find the reasoning to be quite justified.
9
10 > It's probably a little early to initiate such a proposal, seeing as
11 > the
12 > PMS is still undergoing review. Why don't we just let the current
13 > course of events continue, instead of trying to force any specific
14 > issue? I'm sure that if the council decides to initiate a project to
15 > seriously pursue replacing portage as the official package manager,
16 > they
17 > will take into account these repercussions of which you speak. At the
18 > very least, you can bring them up at that time.
19
20 I look forward to using a better package manager then :)
21
22 Cheers,
23 --
24 Anant
25 --
26 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list