From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FgN5h-0002qy-GL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 17 May 2006 14:33:34 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k4HETD5U027853; Wed, 17 May 2006 14:29:13 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4HELYnI017848 for ; Wed, 17 May 2006 14:21:35 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC01764381 for ; Wed, 17 May 2006 14:21:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 14855-04 for ; Wed, 17 May 2006 14:21:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from iglu.bnet.local (d039162.adsl.hansenet.de [80.171.39.162]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE6CA643A7 for ; Wed, 17 May 2006 14:21:27 +0000 (UTC) From: Carsten Lohrke To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 16:21:13 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060516161549.442b4d8a@localhost> <200605170158.26619.carlo@gentoo.org> <20060517145051.49dbbf0b@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <20060517145051.49dbbf0b@snowdrop.home> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1894301.dHmVtj9dPY"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200605171621.24458.carlo@gentoo.org> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.348 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.170, BAYES_00=-2.599, FORGED_RCVD_HELO=0.135, RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL=1.946] X-Spam-Score: -0.348 X-Spam-Level: X-Archives-Salt: cf1b5845-35b1-4493-bbee-9b962386c497 X-Archives-Hash: ff42d147e2a3802da18ff84add31943c --nextPart1894301.dHmVtj9dPY Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 17 May 2006 15:50, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 17 May 2006 01:58:02 +0200 Carsten Lohrke > > wrote: > | I haven't had a look at Paludis (the name sucks as much as the name > | eselect had, before it was named eselect, btw.) yet, so I don't have > | an opinion on it > > Aah, and this sums up this entire thread. "The name sucks. I haven't > used it. It isn't pink enough." Please do not mix up the flaming between you and Diego with my email. Yes, = it=20 isn't pink enough and I don't like your ponytail either. :p > Nice idea in theory. In reality, Portage is a big incestuous mess and > can't have that kind of change made to it The former yes, the latter statement is questionable. > , and defining such an=20 > interface between package manager parts would take considerably more > time and code than just rewriting the whole thing. That won't mean you face the same situation at one point again, so you like= ly=20 have to spent the same or even more amount of time, just over a longer time= =20 frame. > Having said that,=20 > you can swap around pretty much any component of Paludis, since it's > proper modular code -- Kugelfang has a mostly working implementation of > a CRAN repository, for example. Doesn't sound like independent runtime components, as I am proposing. Carsten --nextPart1894301.dHmVtj9dPY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEazFkVwbzmvGLSW8RAv4nAJ9/OsvFMJMetsysrGKxZHWcykfLiACeIU5G qRusjvF9XlIQWT5rtsgge6A= =FOfh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1894301.dHmVtj9dPY-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list