| 1 |
On Wednesday 17 May 2006 23:55, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 17:38:45 -0400 Mark Loeser <halcy0n@g.o> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> wrote: |
| 5 |
> | As the QA lead, I am requesting that until the Council convenes and |
| 6 |
> | decides on how we should proceed, that we not add anything else to |
| 7 |
> | the tree for the sole reason of supporting another package manager's |
| 8 |
> | features. This includes profiles or any other packages. This will |
| 9 |
> | reduce headaches for all of us, and hopefully cut down on needless |
| 10 |
> | arguments that get us no where. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Several arch teams have already stated their intention to go ahead with |
| 13 |
> a Paludis profile, be it top level (ideal) or as a subprofile of their |
| 14 |
> own individual profiles. Is there any technical reason that the QA lead |
| 15 |
> wants to override the arch teams' wishes? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Adding profiles is technically broken. This is a QA violation, so very |
| 18 |
much a QA lead problem. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Further it creates a split in the gentoo organization. That makes it a |
| 21 |
metastructure, i.e. ME, problem. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Paul |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 27 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 28 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 29 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives