On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 12:40:35PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Saturday 24 December 2005 05:45, Spider (DmD Lj) wrote: > > On Sat, 2005-12-24 at 03:37 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > On Saturday 24 December 2005 03:23, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > > > > On Friday 23 December 2005 19:12, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 18:57:44 +0100 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > | Do those already work then? I'd like to be able to use them. > > > > > > > > > > Not in anything end users should be using. The syntax is pretty much > > > > > decided upon though... > > > > > > > > Glad that they are comming though. Even though I'd probably not hold my > > > > breath. > > > > > > Trolling? > > > > Erm.. No, I don't think he is. We've been asking / waiting for the > > [use] syntax to appear since before you joined the project. It's been on > > "the list" for so long that many of us have given up... ; ) > > Yep, bug 2272.
(still was trolling). > > I don't think its trolling when we've been let down on it in the past, > > had it postponed to "the great redesign" ( project baghira, I think, > > too) And so on. > > "Even though I'd probably not hold my breath"? It's something that many > people > want but most are not evening willing to attempt implementing it. What was > the purpose of that comment? Expanding on this since jason's email is quite a bit nicer then my original response. Frankly... the potshot at portage is mild bullshit, but at this point I'm getting accustomed to it- bit easier to take a swipe at portage rather then to do actual work improving things (low blow potentially, but it sure as hell seems to be the case). If folks are looking to get this feature, here's how you scratch that itch. 1) design and implement your own stable based patch that is maintainable. 2) help complete the saviour branch which holds a massive refactoring (including use/slot required refactoring). Use/Slot is already sitting in that branch btw, although the resolver handling of it (ability to dig itself out of use cycles) isn't there yet. 3) help with the day to day bug mangling, regression fixes, and general maintenance. Or work on the small features that need to be dealt with; either way, help reduce the load so existing portage devs can implement the beast. Note that nowhere in that list, is nagging/snarky comments/general asshattery on public ml's listed as a means to get what you want. That's actually something of a negative contribution, since time is spent sending pissy emails such as this, or just results in people saying "screw portage work". Devs making noise, you know what the scenario is, you're on the receiving end of it too for your area of work. Portage is no different. It's really pretty simple- get off your butt and chip in if you want it, else you're on _our_ timeline (eg, we implement it when we deem it sane/ready to go). It's been 3 years for the bug- more then ample time to have contributed for some of the devs complaining in this thread. Chip in, or bite your tongue essentially. ~harring
pgp8Y001vliBX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
