Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Daniel Robbins <drobbins.daniel@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2007 05:12:23
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting by Ciaran McCreesh
1 On 3/2/07, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org> wrote:
2 > So, er, to whom does this deadline apply then, if not the people
3 > writing PMS?
5 I have no clue.
7 PMS is not a Gentoo project, so they can't impose a deadline on you.
9 I don't think PMS is deserving of the council's time, as it is not an
10 specification aimed at interoperability, but is a spec for a
11 non-Gentoo project. The fact that it uses Portage as inspiration for
12 its overall design, and is aiming to be compatible with Portage is
13 irrelevant. In my opinion, it falls outside both the council's area of
14 influence *and* intended focus.
16 I believe that Paludis should be treated like any other upstream
17 project. As such, I don't think the council should spend much time
18 thinking about Paludis, and we should also not spend a
19 disproportionate amount of time discussing its design on our mailing
20 lists. If anyone is interested in Paludis cross-compatibility, they
21 can join Paludis lists or irc channels and discuss this with Paludis
22 developers on these lists (in my opinion.) I think there has been way
23 too much blurring of these boundaries as well - partly your fault.
25 I agree with Ciaran that the mention of "PMS: deadlines and interested
26 parties" in the Council agenda trancends the actual authority of the
27 Gentoo Council and should be reconsidered or at least massively
28 clarified so we can understand why it is relevant for the Council to
29 be discussing in the first place.
31 -Daniel
32 --
33 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting Daniel Robbins <drobbins.daniel@×××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>