[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Paludis and Profiles

[Duncan]

Stephen Bennett <spb@g.o> posted 20060517175622.6e685699@localhost,
excerpted below, on  Wed, 17 May 2006 17:56:22 +0100:

> On Wed, 17 May 2006 16:28:21 +0000 (UTC) "Duncan" <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Herein lies the crux of the problem, IMO.  Regardless of all the other
>> arguments made, I simply cannot believe it is reasonable to ask that
>> Gentoo devs give their blessing to add to the tree something that hasn't
>> yet even been written, let alone tested not to break anything with
>> existing portage.
>
> The initial request was for any objections to the principle. Since people
> asked for a concrete example of what was going in, I provided it.

Point made.  I guess I have a different view of the order things would go
in, tho.  I'd have the overlay and have tested it, so I could make a
concrete statement that it didn't affect portage except if someone chose
the wrong profile (and could defend the reversibility of that mistake
claim based on real tests, if I were to make it), before even /asking/ for
tree changes.

Anyway, the discussion is going on, now, so too late for what might have
been.

Someone will no doubt tell me to go put it on my blog, but...  it seems
appropriate. Sometimes I feel like Rodney King have felt, when he asked..
"Can't we all just get along?"  =8^) I know it's a bit idealistic to think
that way, but...  I just see so many folks blowing small things so out of
proportion, and so little effort being made to see the situation from the
other guy's perspective, before the reply. =8^(  It just seems such things
cost needless stress at the minimum, lost hours and less smooth operations
in many cases, and the loss of valuable developers and possibly forks, at
the extreme end.  OTOH, it's obviously not just Gentoo with such issues,
as there are cases in point littering both the FLOSS and closed source
communities.  (Of course, the FLOSS community ones tend to be more
publicly visible.)

Bringing that back home... trying to see both viewpoint here, it seems to
me the logical next step is that proof of concept overlay or whatever one
wishes to call it.  One way or another, it's needed, whether or not it's
ultimately allowed in the tree as a profile, so getting it done and
getting the debate onto concrete terms would seem useful.  If it's decided
not to have it in the tree at this time, then the work can continue to be
used as an overlay.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list