I don't see the point for this reply seeing that Andrew admitted he was in error half-an-hour ago in this very thread.
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Ciaran McCreesh<ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:08:01 -0400 > Andrew D Kirch <trel...@trelane.net> wrote: >> I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use the EAPI's (or >> PMS) in the first place. > > If that were true, which it isn't, then by Council decision pkgcore > should have been package.masked. > >> This essentially leaves you writing documents you're requiring for >> paludis support. > > No, it leaves me writing documents used by Portage, Pkgcore, Paludis > and at least two more independent under-development third party package > management libraries. > >> As this seems to be mostly a PM issue, it should be taken elsewhere. > > This thread is necessary for Portage support for EAPI 3, which is being > worked on. It also has considerable developer impact, since depending > upon the decisions made, certain existing conventions may no longer > apply to EAPI 3 things. > > Given that your stated intention is for "Paludis to fail", and that > "opposing [me] and everything [I] do was an initiative [you] started > only after careful consideration", I'll kindly ask you to stop randomly > jumping out and flinging turds, since it adds nothing to the discussion > at hand and only serves to make it harder for Gentoo to function as a > community. > > -- > Ciaran McCreesh > -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan
