Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for agenda items, council meeting 8/October/2017 18:00 UTC

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 7:05 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
>
> In addition, Portage doesn't support empty groups since 2011. That for
> itself is not an argument to change PMS, but it shows that there is no
> need for the construct.
>

If the behavior of portage doesn't match the specification in PMS that
is reason enough to change one or the other.  The purpose of PMS is to
document how package managers are supposed to behave.

You could:

1.  Change portage to behave as PMS specifies.
2.  Change PMS to specify portage's behavior.
3.  Change PMS to make the behavior explicitly undefined.

Sure, this might be a lower-priority bug but this seems like a valid
one.  What is the point in having a specification if we don't actually
specify what we're doing?

-- 
Rich