Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009)
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:01:16
Message-Id: 20090223170103.14429f5a@snowcone
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009) by Alexis Ballier
1 On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:48:27 +0100
2 Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote:
3 > > ...and then we have to do the whole thing again every time something
4 > > new crops up.
5 >
6 > Please give an example because I fail to see how.
7
8 New version suffix rules. New bash versions. New package naming rules.
9 Partially composable EAPIs. Tree-provided internals. Consistent variable
10 namespacing. Metadata via function calls.
11
12 > > EAPI was supposed to solve this, and profile eapi and
13 > > GLEP 55 finish the job. Repeatedly going back and saying "oh, we
14 > > have to wait another year or more again" is unacceptable.
15 >
16 > Had we found a compromise at the beginning of glep55, that extra year
17 > would be over by now...
18
19 And we'd be starting on the next batch of "oh, we need to wait another
20 year". Had GLEP 55's necessity been accepted a year ago, we'd have a
21 whole bunch of requested features implemented by now.
22
23 --
24 Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies