Re: [gentoo-dev] The fallacies of GLEP55

["Tomáš Chvátal" <scarabeus@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2512 bytes --]

Dne čtvrtek 14 Květen 2009 20:39:07 Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a):
> Where on earth are you getting the idea that GLEP 55 makes things
> slower? The only difference to the code with GLEP 55 is in checking
> file extensions against a slightly larger set of strings, which is
> nowhere near a measurable increase in anything. You're claiming that
> checking for a suffix of either ".ebuild-4" or ".ebuild" against a
> fixed string is in any way relevant, which is obviously trolling.
Read the block once more, he is not stating that adding suffix to the filename 
is slower.
>
> > "Having GLEP55 allows us to add GLEP54 without issues!"
> > Yeah, uhm, the live-ness of an ebuild is an attribute. How about we
> > add it to metadata, as we should for all metadata? Define a key, I
> > don't know ... LIVE ? LIVE="true". There. No need to fix the
> > filename. And now stop mixing up issues because it is highly
> > confusing!
>
> There is no existing version ordering solution that accurately
> represents upstream scm branches.
>
> > A few words in closing -
> >
> > We can encode all the relevant info in "the first line of the ebuild
> > starting with EAPI="
>
> No we can't. That's *obviously* completely wrong.
We actualy can, you consider it wrong, so we all should do so
>
> > The overhead of parsing out this value for all ebuilds in the tree
> > has been timed at ~2 CPU-seconds by solar. It's negligible.
>
> Those of us who have been measuring this have been discarding CPU time
> entirely, since it's utterly irrelevant. That you bring CPU time into
> this shows you've been deliberately ignoring everything we've said.
Well cpu is not real benchmark, but if it took 2 secs it means the tweaking is 
not worth efforts.
>
> We all know you're not stupid enough to believe what you've been
> posting or ignorant enough to miss the point so badly. So please stop
> pretending -- this issue would have gone through a long time ago were
> it not for you and your ilk deliberately pretending to be retarded so
> you can raise straw man arguments against it rather than addressing the
> issues at hand. You're doing both yourself and everyone else a huge
> disfavour by acting dumb and assuming everyone else is going to play
> along with that.
And this is really just personal offense which you should take out from your 
mails if you want somebody to take your experience acordingly to your 
knowledge and not just judge you as 10 year old whining kid.

Tomas

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]