| 1 |
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 08:32:15PM -0600, Daniel Robbins wrote: |
| 2 |
> But something like GLEP 26 "package updates" is not a required part of |
| 3 |
> Gentoo. I think it's an admirable goal once someone figures out a way to get |
| 4 |
> it working predictably and reliably, and users could enjoy this capability. |
| 5 |
> At the same time, its benefits need to be weighed against the robustness of |
| 6 |
> the actual implementation (is it worth it? Does it work well enough) and the |
| 7 |
> amount of developer and infrastructure resources it could eat up (which, if |
| 8 |
> too ambitious, could be HUGE.) |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
I don't mind if a project is (too) ambitious. If enough developers are |
| 11 |
willing to put time and other resources in it, I'm all in favor. It is just |
| 12 |
this kind of ambitious projects that makes Gentoo different from the other |
| 13 |
distributions. We allow ambition and far-fetched visions to be formed and |
| 14 |
developed. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Many developers will probably see no real opportunity (for Gentoo or for |
| 17 |
themselves) in such a project. That's fine, but other developers who do |
| 18 |
should get the chance to try and see. Who knows? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Let's just hope that those developers can take a "see, told ye" answer |
| 21 |
because they might receive that :) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Wkr, |
| 24 |
Sven Vermeulen |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
^__^ And Larry saw that it was Good. |
| 28 |
(oo) Sven Vermeulen |
| 29 |
(__) http://www.gentoo.org Documentation & PR |
Archives