Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoostats, SoC 2011
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 14:50:45
Message-Id: CAGfcS_nuTD2BC8KF2RZJNSU5Qnnewhi8ea_LH-EmrFGZA_iFFQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoostats, SoC 2011 by Alec Warner
1 On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote:
2 > We did post to -dev, hence this thread.
3
4 My post was intended to be general in applicability, and not critical
5 of the particular instance of this issue being discussed.
6
7 I would generally suggest that implementing this as a package and not
8 as a function built-into portage would tend to make more sense to me
9 (do we really want portage to do EVERYTHING?). However, I don't think
10 that anybody needs anybody's blessing in particular to take one course
11 or the other there. And, in the Gentoo tradition of
12 everybody-does-whatever-they-want-to, there is nothing wrong with one
13 set of devs doing it one way and another set doing it another way so
14 that we end up with two data repositories with somewhat redundant data
15 so that we can start another discussion on -dev about what the
16 differences in the datasets mean. That is, until eventually devs get
17 bored and after enough bugs pile up one or both of the collection
18 mechanisms gets treecleaned. Then in five years somebody can build a
19 new one. :)
20
21 If I had strong concerns with anything that seemed likely to get
22 adopted I'd voice them.
23
24 Rich