| 1 |
> > > > The real blocker for features that I'd like Gentoo to support is |
| 2 |
> > > > Portage. There is only 1½ people working on it and changing anything in |
| 3 |
> > > > it is hard because Portage is a horrible mess. There's plenty of |
| 4 |
> > > > activity in the tree but new desired features cannot be used in the |
| 5 |
> > > > tree until Portage supports them. It also doesn't make matters better |
| 6 |
> > > > that over the years all sorts of weird hacks (that now have to be |
| 7 |
> > > > supported) have been added to the tree instead of waiting for proper |
| 8 |
> > > > solutions. Most people who are capable of helping to improve Portage |
| 9 |
> > > > just don't want to touch it. |
| 10 |
> > > |
| 11 |
> > > Would you say that portage is the main block in the way of Gentoo's |
| 12 |
> > > continued progress? |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > Actually I guess that's pretty much exactly what you said. I didn't |
| 15 |
> > realize portage is where the problem lies. In fact, I thought we were |
| 16 |
> > all still proud of portage I'm going to think about this some. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> It all depends on what kind of features you're interested in. The features I |
| 19 |
> happen to be interested in requires ebuild changes (which means that me using |
| 20 |
> another package manager doesn't help) *and* requires package manager support |
| 21 |
> before said ebuild changes can happen. Therefore for me Portage is a |
| 22 |
> blocker... |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
What does everyone else think about this. Is portage a major blocker |
| 25 |
of progress or not so much? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
- Grant |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives