Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:54:42
Message-Id: 20070330135108.248ccf76@snowflake
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis by "Thomas Rösner"
1 On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 09:49:38 +0200
2 Thomas Rösner <Thomas.Roesner@××××××××××××××.de> wrote:
3 > > A package manager that supports a better binary package format
4 > > (split out local metadata would be a good start) combined with a
5 > > third party binary provider could deliver that with no tree changes.
6 >
7 > But then you'd need a tree of binary packages, which you'd only get
8 > with many users of your package manager, which would depend on
9 > official Gentoo adoption
11 The sort of people who are likely to go ahead and make a decent binary
12 tree are the sort who don't particularly care whether a package manager
13 is officially supported, so long as it does the job well.
15 > I think you know that and that's why you did work on PMS
17 PMS doesn't say anything about binary packages, for one...
19 > Hm, perhaps you should let somebody else do the PR for paludis? :-)
21 This has nothing to do with PR. It's to do with whether or not Gentoo
22 has a viable future.
24 --
25 Ciaran McCreesh


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