| 1 |
On 03/01/17 11:05, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 16:00:52 +0700 (+07) |
| 3 |
> grozin@g.o wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> On Mon, 2 Jan 2017, Brian Evans wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> IMO, this one should be given last-rites as upstream is dead and it |
| 7 |
>>> heavily depends on wireless-tools and WEXT. |
| 8 |
>> I use it on 2 notebooks. It works fine, and is (from my point of view) the |
| 9 |
>> most convenient tool to control ethernet and wifi connections on a |
| 10 |
>> notebook. Why lastrite it when it works? |
| 11 |
> This is the Gentoo Way™. Having a working software is not a goal. |
| 12 |
> Gentoo focuses on the best bleeding edge experience and therefore |
| 13 |
> highly relies on software packages that are under active development |
| 14 |
> and require active maintenance. The packages in early stages of |
| 15 |
> development are especially interesting since they can supply users |
| 16 |
> and developers with variety of interesting bugs and unpredictable |
| 17 |
> issues. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
From your response I infer the following, please discuss: |
| 20 |
1) "working software is not a goal" .. so we can have a tree full of |
| 21 |
broken and/or unstable packages. What is the point of any QA/CI system |
| 22 |
if this is applicable? |
| 23 |
2) "require active maintainance" .. by whom exactly? Where are the flood |
| 24 |
of keen developers bringing their bleeding edge code (with their |
| 25 |
ludicrous packaging requirements and language demands) to Gentoo? |
| 26 |
3) "interesting bugs and unpredictable isssue" .. WTF? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Michal .. are you (once again...) High .. or is your email (once again) |
| 29 |
so soaked in sarcasm we can't tell any useful content from the complete |
| 30 |
drivel ... |
Archives