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 1FgQyP-0007Lb-1s for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 17 May 2006 18:42:17 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k4HIaSbw000099; Wed, 17 May 2006 18:36:28 GMT Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc12.comcast.net [216.148.227.152]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4HISHpn015597 for ; Wed, 17 May 2006 18:28:18 GMT Received: from nightcrawler (c-24-21-135-117.hsd1.or.comcast.net[24.21.135.117]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with SMTP id <20060517182816m12003uo31e>; Wed, 17 May 2006 18:28:16 +0000 Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 11:27:57 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles Message-ID: <20060517182756.GE30935@nightcrawler> References: <20060516161549.442b4d8a@localhost> <20060516191631.GA18817@superlupo.rechner> <20060517092319.GA2997@superlupo> <20060517173238.6d364603@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; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Hf61M2y+wYpnELGG" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060517173238.6d364603@snowdrop.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: ffa253a7-f30b-458a-96e0-e4854cfbe72f X-Archives-Hash: 98e324a0d08fd5bcb8b70580c63da942 --Hf61M2y+wYpnELGG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 05:32:38PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 17 May 2006 11:23:19 +0200 Wernfried Haas > wrote: > | We really should figure that stuff out before we start integrating an > | externally written package manager we have no influence on whatsoever >=20 > How much influence does your typical Gentoo developer or user have over > the development of Portage? Please consider long-standing feature > requests such as :slot and [use] deps in your answer. Can we *please* avoid the portage bashing for at least a few days? =20 As we've discussed in the past, sane base design and you can do=20 use/slot without too much trouble. Folks *do* request things of=20 portage, and it *does* get added- multilib came about via requests=20 =66rom lv (pretty quick turn around), axxo's need for env tricks to deal=20 with /etc/profile issues* results in pre/post phase hooks being added,=20 etc. Portage devs work with a crap source trying to implement what folks=20 want- the code does fight certain features. That doesn't mean you can=20 construe it as "portage devs don't listen" as you're implying. Besides that, lay off 'em. Lot of people want features out of=20 portage, but nobody ever steps up- usually what comes of it is just=20 someone flaming them, rather then providing a patch. ~harring --Hf61M2y+wYpnELGG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEa2ssvdBxRoA3VU0RAo5VAKC4qvOtbEuLmrDoL8xrgpqYbqMrIACghhIx wOP8TlnNFr+cznbltRvaIQU= =bdt4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Hf61M2y+wYpnELGG-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list