Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: George Shapovalov <george@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: portage-ng roadmap?
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 21:15:03
Message-Id: 200406291415.18659.george@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: portage-ng roadmap? by Hasan Khalil
1 Well, what's going on is not that its "legally dead". It got its start and we
2 threw a bunch of comments on the "design". However there does not seem to be
3 much push behind it at the moment. I suspect there may be only one dev
4 working on it (pvdabeel?), if at all. However there is clearly an effort to
5 clean-up and enhance the [oroginal] portage under way.
6
7 So, if there is enough interest I guess portage-ng may be "restarted", but it
8 will take a lot of *sustained* interest to do so.
9 (And no, I am not the dev working on it nor did I do much work on it :), I
10 just followed the progress for some time).
11
12 George
13
14 On Tuesday 29 June 2004 11:44, Hasan Khalil wrote:
15 > There are, absolutely, people working on portage for alternative
16 > platforms. I am one of four developers in training, shooting to work on
17 > gentoo-macos. pvdabeel is the gentoo-macos god currently, so he can fill
18 > you in with all the details.
19 >
20 > I'm wondering the same, actually (regarding all the portage limitations
21 > listed on the portage-ng page). What's going on, then?
22
23
24
25 --
26 gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Re: portage-ng roadmap? Adrian Gschwend <ktk@×××××××.org>