| 1 |
On Tue, 2020-06-23 at 19:58 +0200, Patrick Lauer wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2020-06-23 19:34, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Tue, 2020-06-23 at 19:17 +0200, Patrick Lauer wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > We haven't had a new EAPI in a while. I hope it stays that way, |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Are you saying you're against fixing bugs in the current EAPI and |
| 7 |
> > would |
| 8 |
> > prefer ignoring the problems that have been identified so far? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Have you stopped punching yourself? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Nice false dichotomy you've set up, let me instead talk about |
| 13 |
> something |
| 14 |
> unrelated ... |
| 15 |
> > > and we |
| 16 |
> > > might even reduce the amount of active EAPIs even more so that |
| 17 |
> > > there's |
| 18 |
> > > fewer surprises |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > Are you going to achieve that by committing more ebuilds using |
| 21 |
> > deprecated EAPIs? |
| 22 |
> > |
| 23 |
> Ah damn it must feel good to yell at people. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> I know what you mean, you know what you mean, everyone else is most |
| 26 |
> likely confused. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> ... do you think this is a good use of time of the readers of this |
| 29 |
> mailinglist? |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> May I suggest that you keep your personal grievances to yourself and |
| 32 |
> possibly, maybe, not bother other people with it? But that's too much |
| 33 |
> to |
| 34 |
> ask, and you REALLY like to attack me personally. (Like, I write two |
| 35 |
> emails and BAM there's a gorny trying to throw shade ... which is why |
| 36 |
> I've mostly abstained from mailinglists for a while. Too predictable |
| 37 |
> and |
| 38 |
> no useful results) |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> So to get back to your first question, if there are useful changes |
| 41 |
> then |
| 42 |
> of course we can discuss them. From my point of view that's fixing |
| 43 |
> the |
| 44 |
> wrong things (the ebuild format in itself is ... hmm ... not very |
| 45 |
> optimal). And we've backdated changes into existing EAPIs, so if it's |
| 46 |
> "just" a bug the specification could be ammended and problem solve. |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> To get back to the issue of personal attacks, I don't particularly |
| 50 |
> enjoy |
| 51 |
> your brand of negativity, and would appreciate it if you didn't spray |
| 52 |
> it |
| 53 |
> around like a male cat. I doubt you'll even understand this, as |
| 54 |
> you've |
| 55 |
> carefully managed to skip any criticism before. |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
> Oh well, didn't have a proper flamewar in a while. Not going to have |
| 59 |
> one. Sad. |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
> Be excellent to each other, |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> Patrick |
| 65 |
> |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
Rest assured, those aren't just "personal grievances" of mgorny, lots of |
| 68 |
people share them. Maybe time for some introspection on your part? |
Archives