On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 04:02:50 -0500 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Saturday 03 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > If there's some value to be found in having PMS ready by a > > particular date that I'm missing then I want to hear it so that I > > can spend more time working on PMS and less on other things. > > semantics aside, how much time you dedicate is entirely up to you and > really, i dont think there's too many developers who honestly care > how that affects you
Well yes, but I'm perfectly prepared to reprioritise things if there's a good reason for it. If there's a real need for PMS to be done by a particular date, PMS can be done by said date. > i consider having a spelled out EAPI=0 spec to be quite valuable and > worth spending time on and i have to say that i get the feeling that > i'm not alone on this point Yes, but I'd like to hear *why*. Not only for the prioritisation aspect, but also to make sure that what's being written matches the needs of the people that will be using it. > having a behavior explanation cuts back on the "well it works in > portage so go screw yourself" mentality and replaces it with "package > manger foo does not behave according to spec" which certainly opens > up the door for people to use alternative package managers with the > Gentoo ebuild tree So is alternative package manager support something that's considered important and a priority by the Council? > (hmm we're gonna have to stop referring to it as the "Gentoo portage > tree" eh) Funnily enough, the Paludis class that deals with ebuild trees is called PortageRepository. I don't particularly like the name... -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
