Mike Auty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sun, 01 Apr 2007 23:43:37 +0100:
Snipped a lot of well stated opinion... > So now the question is, are we willing to accept the cons for the pros, > or do we need to find a different solution. If not, then other package > managers should invest their time in ratifying a specification quickly, > so that they can get down to coding to the specification. Also, those > against a new manager, should get down to agreeing the specification so > that managers with the possibility of fracturing are bound within a > framework of acceptability. As I see it, that leaves both sides working > towards the same direction, and should give impetus to both groups to > come to a common point as fast as possible. > If not, then probably we should return to the drawing board, but I > concur that bickering and worrying about the future without pinpointing > the problem and trying to tackle it, is far more futile than working > towards a viable solution... I think you said it better than I did. =8^) Taking a bit of a bent, here... Of course, from the (amd64) user side, the single missing feature I think of most often is missing full multi- arch, not for me personally as I do source only, but there are a lot of folks that would certainly not miss having to do the chroot thing to get the full usual benefits of Gentoo -- the pre-compiled emul- packages are nice and definitely serve a purpose, but just aren't the same. Do either of the alternatives deal with that? -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
