| 1 |
>>>>> On Fri, 13 Apr 2018, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike) wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Taking into account that the letter and not the spirit of GLEP 39 is |
| 4 |
> usually thrown around as a weapon ("INFORMATIVE", HAH!). I strongly |
| 5 |
> disrecommend having more "informative" policies. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Sorry, but I don't understand what you are talking about. GLEP types |
| 8 |
are defined in GLEP 1 [1]: |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
,---- |
| 11 |
| A Standards Track GLEP describes a new feature or implementation |
| 12 |
| for Gentoo Linux. An Informational GLEP provides general guidelines |
| 13 |
| or information to the Gentoo Linux community, but does not propose |
| 14 |
| a new feature. |
| 15 |
`---- |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Michał's GLEP doesn't describe any new feature, but aims to document |
| 18 |
current practice. Therefore it cannot be of type "Standards Track". |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> [...] |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> As a closing note, I'm really getting tired of all this "Either you |
| 23 |
> write ebuilds or you are a piece of shit" philosophy that is running |
| 24 |
> on the ambient nowadays. If such people want a developer centric |
| 25 |
> source based distro, who gives shit about the non developers I |
| 26 |
> strongly recommend trying Exherbo instead. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
This is not helpful. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Ulrich |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
[1] https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0001.html#kinds-of-gleps |
Archives