On Saturday 03 March 2007 23:14, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 05:57:35 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Two angles on the behaviour BS; either related to the fact I'm dead > > set on the spec reflecting portage behaviour, and being finished, or > > it's related to the fact the paludis devs generally speaking would be > > the first group of folks lining up to kick me in the balls.
To Ciaran: even though my following statements could be considered retorts, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the above. > No, it's that you're dead set on derailing it and being as unhelpful as > possible. My experience with Brian has always been that he's genuinely intent on being helpful. The issue, I would think, is that you find is manner (as illustrated by the above quote) to be irritating. That leads to his intention of helping to being unrealized. For the record, I've found his manner irritating at times in the past as well, although arguments have always been limited to IRC. > You have absolutely nothing to contribute, As Alec mentioned, Brian definitely has a lot to offer in terms of knowledge. > as evidenced by every previous time you've gotten involved with anything > I've done, and given how badly you tried to screw up GLEP 42 and how much > of my time you wasted doing so, I'm not sure about other instances. There seems to be a lot that I didn't see - perhaps on IRC? But if I recall the mailing list discussions correctly, if anybody can be accused of trying to derail it that person would be me. However, I wasn't trying to derail it. As with Brian and yourself above, I found your manner to be irritating which led to my intent on being helpful being unrealized. It might be helpful to the current discussion of PMS so I'll go a little into what I think went wrong there. You had an idea of how multiple repositories would function as did myself and Brian (the two most active portage devs at the time). These ideas were developed independently and neither were implemented or even rfc'd. There were two separate specifications - glep42 and multiple repositories - that should have been discussed seperately. On a seperate thread, Marius said something to the effect of "specs are much easier to extend than to alter". Having read that, I think we were both wrong - specification of a repository should probably have been left out completely until repositories had been hashed out. To sidetrack just a little more, I think this illustrates one of the reasons why having PMS (aka EAPI-0 spec) completed is so important. Not only would it allow for Gentoo package manager(s) to be interchanged/replaced, it would provide a incontrovertible context for discussion of new features. > I really don't want to deal with your noise ever again. I'll address this in my last "retort". > You also have a lot to gain by wrecking the process, Quite the contrary. Brian is in exactly the same position as you - other than having a representative of his project helping to prepare PMS (unless these threads have misled me). Any loss you suffer from not having a complete EAPI-0 specification is his loss too. > and your past behaviour has shown that you'll stoop to any kind of dirty > trickery and abuse of the system that you think you can get away with > rather than having a proper technical discussion. > > Frame it any way you want, but so far as I'm concerned there is nothing > of value you can possibly provide that would make up for the headache > of having to handle your own unique form of input. > > But hey, it's up to spb, not me. Try emailing him if you want access. I > couldn't give you svn access even if I wanted to. This is really irrelevant. It's not matter of "if" he gets access but only as to "when". After the initial work is done and the team is ready to go public all his "noise" will come out. I can only think of two choices here: 1) whether you and he both continue to be visceral or instead try to build a good working relationship; and 2) whether you discuess any issues with the spec now or when it goes public. -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
