Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Reminder for May 28

[Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1584 bytes --]

On Thu, 28 May 2009 22:56:46 +0200
Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org> wrote:
> So, basically, we can't do anything, because the universe might
> spontaneously decide to cease to exist. Quite scary, that. 

No. What we do is don't design a fragile solution. We design a solution
that can handle users doing what we reasonably expect users to do.

> > No-one has provided a viable way of extending the version format
> > that doesn't require EAPI changes. So unless you're talking about
> > your "start a whole new tree" idea,
> Wait, I thought noone had provided a way ... except that one ...
> argh, cognitive dissonance detected. 
> 
> I'm sorry, you contradicted yourself. Please choose one option only.

"Viable".

> > No-one is suggesting making changes to match silly upstream
> > versions.
> But I thought you just said that silly and arbitrary restrictions ...
> I am confused. You are in a quantum superposition state where you
> support both sides of an argument and only collapse your brainwave
> functions whenever someone tries to observe you or something ... 

I said that allowing _rc but forbidding -rc was silly and arbitrary.

> > What we are suggesting is making changes to match sensible and
> > reasonable upstream versions.
>
> Which we already have. Excellent, so you agree that we don't need to
> change versioning. Sometimes I really like discussing with you,
> because after a long time you suddenly accept reason :)

No, we don't allow 1.1-rc1, which is a sensible and reasonable upstream
version.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]