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 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HXWKa-0002sm-R1 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 05:40:53 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l2V5cR30021833; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 05:38:27 GMT Received: from qrypto.org (connectioncable-084.headoff.net [217.30.222.84] (may be forged)) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l2V5YXOj014751 for ; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 05:34:34 GMT Received: from rumen.qrypto.org (unknown [192.168.0.2]) by qrypto.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 429661B3614 for ; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 01:28:46 +0300 (EEST) Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 08:36:26 +0300 From: Rumen Yotov To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [soc] Python bindings for Paludis Message-ID: <20070331083626.3cf87403@rumen.qrypto.org> In-Reply-To: <1175282932.5964.9.camel@localhost> References: <200703240028.15461.peper@gentoo.org> <200703271519.29674.vapier@gentoo.org> <20070327211510.0b426e09@snowflake> <200703301404.16400.vapier@gentoo.org> <1175280152.5696.12.camel@sputnik886.lnet> <1175282932.5964.9.camel@localhost> Organization: personal X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.8.1 (GTK+ 2.10.9; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 009188b6-d1d8-404d-bd4b-4dd1fc775693 X-Archives-Hash: b10711d0d66191a935cc719554cffa7d Hi, On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:28:52 -0400 Seemant Kulleen wrote: > On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 20:42 +0200, Matthias Langer wrote: > > > > > i don't think that personal issues should be taken into account > > when it comes to choosing a new official package manager for gentoo. > > It's relevant in that people have to work with the developers of the > package manager. Unlike most other things in the portage tree, the > package manager ties very closely to the very definition of the > distribution itself. Hence, if people are unable to get along, then > by adopting a package manager like that, you inherently adopt the > developers of that package manager and all the personnel issues that > accompany it. > > Ideally, however, I agree with you that it should be based on > technical merits. The reality is that there are people involved. And > people always complicate things. Isn't it true that people are meant to solve/facilitate things, not to make them harder/"more complicate" ? Rumen -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list