Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>
Cc: gentoo-pms@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] Re: kdebuild-1 conditionals
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 22:06:46
Message-Id: 20091211205722.4004a247@snowmobile
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-pms] Re: kdebuild-1 conditionals by Brian Harring
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:35:21 -0800
Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com> wrote:
> PMS cannot be ran in such a way that one person stonewalling is > able to hold up the majority's will. That's always been a flaw w/ > how it was managed and has impacted the resultant spec several times > over.
The majority were about to go and mandate an mtime solution that couldn't be used for compiled python modules. We should be going with what's right, not with the majority. Ramming something through on a majority is a last resort that should only be taken if a solution that's acceptable to everyone cannot be reached. And again: What's wrong with doing a careful, phased withdrawal of kdebuild-1?
> Also, unless I'm on crack, the person leading PMS is fauli- I'd > expect he's the one who can pull the veto trick, not you.
If *anyone* has any objections to patches, we resolve those objections before proceeding. -- Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

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

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-pms] Re: kdebuild-1 conditionals Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>