| 1 |
On Sunday 25 December 2005 02:33, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:56:37 -0800 Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> wrote: |
| 5 |
> | It's really pretty simple- get off your butt and chip in if you want |
| 6 |
> | it, else you're on _our_ timeline (eg, we implement it when we deem |
| 7 |
> | it sane/ready to go). |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Is Portage development done to support the needs of those of us who |
| 10 |
> provide the tree, or is the tree expected to be restricted to whatever |
| 11 |
> Portage developers feel like implementing? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Neither. At least for myself, portage development is done to prioritized |
| 14 |
according to what I see as the needs of users. Needs of "those of us who |
| 15 |
provide the tree" are prioritized by how much benefit will be translated |
| 16 |
to end users combined with how much work will be required. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives