Re: [gentoo-user] baselayout --> openrc ?

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 00:43 on Saturday 23 October 2010, Stroller 
did opine thusly:

> On 22 Oct 2010, at 21:32, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > ...
> > Did you and I read the same mail thread? I read all of it - did you?
>
> Apparently you have poorer reading comprehension that I do:
> >> That Gentoo-dev thread was 3 or 4 months ago, and I haven't read all of
> >> it today.

I saw that. I thought it odd you would cite the thread in your reasoning right 
after saying you hadn't read all of it. I wanted you to see the strangeness of 
that on your own.

> I would stand by my advice:
> >> ... I would discourage anyone in stable
> >> from migrating to Openrc unless they need to, or unless they're deciding
> >> to run entirely ~arch packages on their system. From my understanding I
> >> would "wait and see", and migrate when the devs decide the time is right
> >> for a mass migration of stable users.

That's fine. people running stable should stick with stable for the most part. 
See below.

> This is all totally irrelevant:
> > That's a straw man argument. Roy left Gentoo because of conflicts between
> > his wish to be 100% POSIX compliant ...
> > Roy did not leave openrc development becuase it's a lost cause
>
> and it has nothing to do with what I said.

And your response now has nothing to do with what I said. I wasn't commenting 
on the merits of migrating, I was commenting on you quoting Roy:

"> Roy is the author, his own words:
>    The fact that several people said they would attempt a
>    stable push and then gave up (I was one - lol) says quite a
>    bit really.
"

Now why would you have quoted that? I can see only one reason - the author 
hints at it being not good enough therefore you should look long and hard 
before using it. I pointed out, correctly I believe, that that is irrelevant. 
Roy left Gentoo and openrc because he couldn't have his way re POSIX 
compliance. That's a straw man - setting up a weak disrelated argument to 
somehow prove your point later. It's fallacious.

> My advice was made in response to Neil's comment:
> >>> you may as well do the upgrade when you feel like it rather that when
> >>> the devs decide to flip a keyword.
>
> I've snipped that to an even tighter crop, so that you don't miss what he
> said.

And you snipped out the very quote from Roy above I was commenting on. I saw 
that. So I put it back.

>
> Can I summarise my advice as:
>
>     Don't migrate a single package to ~arch just for the fun of it.
>
> ??
>
> I'm pretty sure you yourself have said in the past to either run stable or
> ~arch, but not to mess around with unmasking the odd single or couple of
> packages here or there. I agree with you, on this occasion.

I never said in this thread that anyone should not do that. I generally do 
advise people to stick with one or the other by and large.
 
> When "the devs decide to flip a keyword" then the documentation for the
> Openrc migration will be at its best. The migration will be fully
> supported for stable users, and there will be lots of discussion about it
> here. It will be the best time to make the switch.
>
> Stroller.
>
>
> PS: please don't CC me on messages to the list.

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com