| 1 |
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 05:26:56 -0800 Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
| > | Seriously? Without an implementation, your spec of what should |
| 4 |
| > | happen will have loads of errors? |
| 5 |
| > |
| 6 |
| > Yes. It will describe what people think is allowed, rather than what |
| 7 |
| > really is. |
| 8 |
| |
| 9 |
| If you're writing the spec to match what "people think", why limit |
| 10 |
| the # of folks involved? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
You're reading that backwards. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
| > b) they're more interested in replacing |
| 15 |
| > the ebuild format |
| 16 |
| |
| 17 |
| Pure and absolute FUD; recall which project has added incompatible |
| 18 |
| version extensions |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Which are optional |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
| which is dropping running *rm when reinstalling the same ver |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
We haven't done that in trunk/ for a while now. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
| which *still* doesn't actually implement overlay logic, |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Sure we do. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
| leading to overlay authors having to copy master files into each |
| 31 |
| overlay branch. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Uh, no. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
| Doing it formally, I hereby request access to PMS specifically with |
| 36 |
| the intention of going over it to spot where it differs from long |
| 37 |
| standing portage behaviour. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
And as you know all too well, given your behaviour on every previous |
| 40 |
discussion we've had related to this, you're not getting it. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
| > | a portage dev such as zmedico |
| 43 |
| > |
| 44 |
| > We have a Portage dev reviewing it. |
| 45 |
| |
| 46 |
| Which, if I may ask? (vague specifics help no one). Zmedico, |
| 47 |
| indicated above isn't (although perhaps you're just being coy, and he |
| 48 |
| is). Genone isn't ever around, bit hard for him to be doing it. |
| 49 |
| Stubbs is mia, kito/exg are both MIA afaik (additionally, prefix |
| 50 |
| specific although both have a pretty good understanding of env |
| 51 |
| requirements due to changing it for the prefix experiment- same goes |
| 52 |
| for grobian despite not being an official portage monkey). |
| 53 |
| |
| 54 |
| That leaves spanky, and antarus, who you specifically contradict |
| 55 |
| within the email. |
| 56 |
| |
| 57 |
| So... which? |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Genone. |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
| > > and Gianelloni for the infrastructure. |
| 62 |
| > |
| 63 |
| > And what on earth do infrastructure have to do with a package |
| 64 |
| > manager specification? |
| 65 |
| |
| 66 |
| Wolf31o2 (chris) is releng moreso; one of the few folks doing |
| 67 |
| non-trivial things with the profiles pretty much, with long term |
| 68 |
| experience doing so. |
| 69 |
| |
| 70 |
| In that regard, he's one of a few handful of people who basically |
| 71 |
| could be considered profile experts- further, he's a catalyst monkey, |
| 72 |
| which at least currently, is the stage building method. |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
Which I know fine well, and which has no relevance to what I said. |
| 75 |
|
| 76 |
| For example, dismissing Chris when he's effectively the "profiles |
| 77 |
| guy". Granted, can involve him afterwards, but don't much see the |
| 78 |
| point in *not* doing it up front. |
| 79 |
|
| 80 |
Just where did I dismiss Chris? |
| 81 |
|
| 82 |
-- |
| 83 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
| 84 |
Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org |
| 85 |
Web : http://ciaranm.org/ |
| 86 |
Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ |
Archives