On Sat, 03 Mar 2007 02:20:48 -0500 Chris Gianelloni
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 06:37 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Nor are most Gentoo projects controlled by Gentoo. Try asking for a
> > new feature in Portage sometime if you think that Gentoo has any
> > say over how pr
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 08:21 +0100, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> What do you think of a simplified handbook ? One that presents a lot
> fewer choices to the user, in order to be less confusing. I don't mean
> replacing the current handbook which is one great piece of work, but
> writing a "Gentoo in 10 e
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 06:37 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Nor are most Gentoo projects controlled by Gentoo. Try asking for a new
> feature in Portage sometime if you think that Gentoo has any say over
> how projects are developed...
Uhh...
Bug #167667
Bug #167668
Just because the features tha
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 02:18:45 -0500 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Saturday 03 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Why is PMS considered so important that it might have a deadline
> > imposed upon it by the Council?
>
> why is an EAPI spec considered important ? it should be plai
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 00:20:36 -0700 "Daniel Robbins"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Nor do I define the direction of PMS. The requirements define its
> > direction, and its contributors (the majority of which are Gentoo
> > developers) do the writing.
>
> But you appear to act as the project lead fo
On 3/3/07, Daniel Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Right now, installing Gentoo is a chore, and the many wonderful
choices of Gentoo end up making the install rather complicated. So I
definitely support ideas to help make our installation process
better/streamlined and less confusing. There are
On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No-one is claiming that Paludis is an official Gentoo project. This
discussion, however, is about PMS, not Paludis, and the only reason I
can see to keep confusing them is political, so please stop doing that.
Sorry, the reason is not politi
On Saturday 03 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Why is PMS considered so important that it might have a deadline
> imposed upon it by the Council?
why is an EAPI spec considered important ? it should be plainly obvious why
something like an EAPI standard matters so much to Gentoo
> As far a
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 01:54:28 -0500 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Saturday 03 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > There is absolutely nothing Paludis specific in PMS. Nor is there
> > anything Pkgcore specific, and the only Portage specific content is
> > where we feel it's necess
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 23:51:42 -0700 "Daniel Robbins"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gentoo projects are controlled by and generally run entirely by Gentoo
> developers.
No, they're controlled by whoever ends up writing code. If you think
there's any control over, say, Portage, try getting an important
On Saturday 03 March 2007, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> On 3/2/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > PMS isn't Paludis. Paludis is an independent implementation (and the
> > only completely independent implementation) of PMS, and it's necessary
> > to have such an independent implementation
On Saturday 03 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> There is absolutely nothing Paludis specific in PMS. Nor is there
> anything Pkgcore specific, and the only Portage specific content is
> where we feel it's necessary to explain *why* something is a particular
> way when that why is down to a Port
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 23:40:07 -0700 "Daniel Robbins"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/2/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > PMS isn't Paludis. Paludis is an independent implementation (and the
> > only completely independent implementation) of PMS, and it's
> > necessary to have such
On 3/2/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's not hosted on Gentoo infrastructure purely because Gentoo
infrastructure can't fulfil the requirements. It's not exactly unique
in that respect...
Nor are most Gentoo projects controlled by Gentoo. Try asking for a new
feature in Portage
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 01:35:49 -0500 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Gentoo needs the EAPI/PMS spec ... if spb/ciaranm have changed the
> goal of the spec from Gentoo package manager to paludis specific,
> then we spb isnt doing what was asked of him and we need to review
> that as well
T
On Saturday 03 March 2007, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> I don't understand half of what you said.
Q: Why is top-posting evil?
A: backwards read don't humans because
> You are saying that PMS is a sub-project of QA? Is the PMS spec hosted
> on Gentoo infrastructure?
the council asked spb to put the
On 3/2/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
PMS isn't Paludis. Paludis is an independent implementation (and the
only completely independent implementation) of PMS, and it's necessary
to have such an independent implementation to ensure that PMS is a
specification rather than a descript
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 23:28:56 -0700 "Daniel Robbins"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK, but it appears that PMS is not hosted on Gentoo infrastructure,
> and its development is not controlled by Gentoo. Therefore it is not a
> Gentoo project, and therefore the Council, QA, etc. should not be
> treating
OK, but it appears that PMS is not hosted on Gentoo infrastructure,
and its development is not controlled by Gentoo. Therefore it is not a
Gentoo project, and therefore the Council, QA, etc. should not be
treating it if it is a Gentoo project.
Right?
-Daniel
On 3/2/07, Andrew Gaffney <[EMAIL PR
On Sat, 03 Mar 2007 00:20:15 -0600 Andrew Gaffney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Daniel Robbins wrote:
> > I don't understand half of what you said.
> >
> > You are saying that PMS is a sub-project of QA? Is the PMS spec
> > hosted on Gentoo infrastructure?
> >
> > From all I have read, PMS is mea
Daniel Robbins wrote:
I don't understand half of what you said.
You are saying that PMS is a sub-project of QA? Is the PMS spec hosted
on Gentoo infrastructure?
From all I have read, PMS is meant to define the functionality of
Paludis itself, which is not a Gentoo project. Because of this, PMS
I don't understand half of what you said.
You are saying that PMS is a sub-project of QA? Is the PMS spec hosted
on Gentoo infrastructure?
From all I have read, PMS is meant to define the functionality of
Paludis itself, which is not a Gentoo project. Because of this, PMS
can't be considered a
On Saturday 03 March 2007, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> On 3/2/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So, er, to whom does this deadline apply then, if not the people
> > writing PMS?
>
> I have no clue.
>
> PMS is not a Gentoo project, so they can't impose a deadline on you.
except that it
In the interests of not being accusatory/one-sided, please replace this phrase:
"- partly your fault"
with the phrase
"due to ambiguity on the part of Gentoo and Paludis"
That is what I meant anyway. I shouldn't have expressed it in such a
negative way. Sorry.
-Daniel
On 3/2/07, Daniel Robbi
On 3/2/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, er, to whom does this deadline apply then, if not the people
writing PMS?
I have no clue.
PMS is not a Gentoo project, so they can't impose a deadline on you.
I don't think PMS is deserving of the council's time, as it is not an
specif
Welcome Matt :)
On 3/1/07, Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Please give the usual warm welcome to Matt "aetius" Drew. Matt pings us
from Durham, North Carolina, USA. He says he lacks the skills that make
someone a software engineer as opposed to a programmer. Well I hope he
has never look
On 3/1/07, Cory Visi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
With Gentoo, once you are up and running, releases become very
unimportant. What do you think?
That's true, but ever wonder why so many people expend so much effort
to have easy-to-use installers? It turns out that if installation is a
pain, many
On 2/28/07, Christian Birchinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Those are theme-engines and not just a few pixmaps and with an rc
file. The main part of those engines are compiled libraries.
Don't treat them like a few files the user just has to copy in
his homedir.
Noted. Thanks for the reminder t
Hey Chris,
I pretty much agree with you in regards to themes. Without strict
rules, we can suddenly have floods of ~300 theme ebuilds and they'll
all get added to the tree. I'd suggest another exception:
#3 It's ok to add themes to Portage if they are part of an official
theme collection for a p
Arch teams, please take a look at http://tinyurl.com/yln96s
and you'll see we have no real open bugs w/ Xfce 4.2 or 4.4 but instead
not many of our fixes has really reached users because of missing
stable keywords. We also have missing ~ keywords and for that reason
meta ebuilds xfce4 and xfce4-ext
On Friday 02 March 2007, Mike Doty wrote:
> Replacing flameeyes: is he even gone?
yes ... that puts UberLord up next:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/voting-logs/council-2006-rank.txt
-mike
pgpu3mkkCacWD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 09:14:32 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > *shrug* and if that's your attitude, somehow I suspect it doesn't
> > really matter what the Council says about PMS at all.
> >
> Get a clue. I've told you twice now that it doesn't apply to you.
> Your paludis people have
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 16:57:43 + Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Having a deadline does not make it more important. It just has a
> deadline.
Well, it's the only thing that would have one. So what would qualify
PMS for that unique status, when things like USE deps, a GLEP 42
implementati
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:55:34 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:30:46 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 07:44:16 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
PMS: De
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:55:34 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:30:46 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 07:44:16 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> wrote:
> PMS
Mike Doty wrote:
PMS: Deadlines and interested parties.
Council Project: Gentoo branded and certified hardware.
Council Project: Hardware vendor certification.
--Taco
Replacing flameeyes: is he even gone?
--taco
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:30:46 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 07:44:16 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
PMS: Deadlines and interested parties.
Can the Council provide a list of other projects that have had
d
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 16:43:10 +
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:30:46 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 07:44:16 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >> PMS: Deadlines and interest
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:30:46 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 07:44:16 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> PMS: Deadlines and interested parties.
> >
> > Can the Council provide a list of other projects that have had
> > de
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 07:44:16 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
PMS: Deadlines and interested parties.
Can the Council provide a list of other projects that have had
deadlines imposed upon them by Gentoo?
You can do your own research; I have no idea if someone m
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 07:44:16 -0800 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> PMS: Deadlines and interested parties.
Can the Council provide a list of other projects that have had
deadlines imposed upon them by Gentoo?
--
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org
W
PMS: Deadlines and interested parties.
Council Project: Gentoo branded and certified hardware.
Council Project: Hardware vendor certification.
--Taco
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
42 matches
Mail list logo
