From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 975261382C5 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 20:27:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9F856E099F; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 20:27:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 409EFE0942 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 20:27:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiot (d202-252.icpnet.pl [109.173.202.252]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AFBC6335C06; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 20:27:04 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1521750420.836.28.camel@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New Portage fork: sys-apps/portage-mgorny From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 21:27:00 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20180322201715.05be1df8@symphony.aura-online.co.uk> References: <1521745426.836.25.camel@gentoo.org> <20180322201715.05be1df8@symphony.aura-online.co.uk> Organization: Gentoo Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.24.6 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 6d4fa8c8-e0ec-42fe-b57d-fd79e26feb1b X-Archives-Hash: e2b2dbbc701bb8a731d4cee0be3c1c93 W dniu czw, 22.03.2018 o godzinie 20∶17 +0000, użytkownik James Le Cuirot napisał: > On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 20:03:46 +0100 > Michał Górny wrote: > > > After 2+ years of repeating disagreements with Portage maintainer(s) > > I have finally decided to fork Portage. My little fork uses technical > > name of 'portage[mgorny]' [1] (to distinguish it from mainline Portage), > > and aims to focus on cleaning up code and adding useful features with > > less concern for infinite bug-by-bug compatibility. > > I hope you will continue with our efforts to drive regular Portage > forwards too. It's been a long road but also very productive. > > I notice that your fork cannot be installed at the same time as regular > Portage. I think this will really hinder any interest in it. Making them co-installable would require creating divergent packages and eventually making a huge mess of almost-identical-but-different Python modules. It's not worth the effort, especially that the two projects are not that divergent. > As > Gentoo developers, we obviously have to make sure things work with the > official package manager and that goes for you too. Would it be > possible for them to coexist? I'm not saying I'll try it though, just > making a suggestion. :) As Gentoo developers, we have have to make sure things work with *all* package managers. That's why we have standards and policies. Unlike mainline Portage, portage[mgorny] follows those policies strictly and therefore any ebuild that works with it should also work with mainline Portage. -- Best regards, Michał Górny