1 |
On Wed, 2019-10-23 at 17:04 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 01:18:02AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote: |
3 |
> > On 10/21/2019 19:36, Matt Turner wrote: |
4 |
> > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 9:42 AM Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> wrote: |
5 |
> > > > Also, another idea is to use a cheap hash function (e.g. fletcher) and just have the mirrors do the hashing behind the scenes. Then we would have the best of both worlds. |
6 |
> > > |
7 |
> > > It probably would have been better to make these suggestions when the |
8 |
> > > GLEP was discussed close to two years ago. |
9 |
> > > |
10 |
> > > I'm glad that we have ideas for improvements but I worry that we're |
11 |
> > > just backseat driving at this point given that the GLEP's now |
12 |
> > > implemented. |
13 |
> > |
14 |
> > Agreed, although, I don't even remember this coming up two years ago. But, |
15 |
> > I was tied up with a lot of work-related stress and tasks, so probably just |
16 |
> > my memory storage backend not having enough cycles to commit it to...neurons. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> After looking at this further, I found that the glep was presented to |
19 |
> us in Jan 2018 on the dev ml [1]. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> I checked all council meeting logs and discovered that this was never |
22 |
> brought to us formally for approval. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> It looks like the developers decided to do this as an |
25 |
> infrastructure/portage project and because of that they felt like they |
26 |
> didn't need a glep. |
27 |
> |
28 |
|
29 |
...or simply forgotten whether it was approved or not after waiting |
30 |
almost two years for Portage team provide a reference implementation. |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
Best regards, |
34 |
Michał Górny |