From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NxNpc-0001C5-DK for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:05:24 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6AD2AE09DC; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 17:05:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f219.google.com (mail-bw0-f219.google.com [209.85.218.219]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 886F7E09C2 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 17:04:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz19 with SMTP id 19so90853bwz.26 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 10:04:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; bh=J9Oud+T+ZIvTyCUU+YAiCsXvC68paUNfUH1dfXgEQ48=; b=rBuICscDaaJeAMfE+ZBNRqaEiH60fEmpb99JLnZ/o8+0qHTlL67h5tFOqSW9vU4ax3 JLc5LfCsNm6ojvVbN8NY529ZLN17EBJZpozFMGkYU4dgwoiBZhbN0kE4v+MVfU9alcfV Ckb1hNe4St2OogKbbsejG7JerCbmwzAlHuUfk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :message-id; b=Vt67LToaonE7vHG+AGmPNVn6bkpSWcpD7zZpvGxlht87R9hOOQBoFcDUim23N/61pE vBf57nZcP7fgF3so3s2ksg3qePySXsytEV99ac4pv3VrWcecOypJfvcWKxopWvA99xnm Ug3vO4u7aJHycZO6XUIdNOssNGX5e2ouEv0Fo= Received: by 10.204.153.24 with SMTP id i24mr1653288bkw.213.1270141491913; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 10:04:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shiny-one.home (host86-181-100-58.range86-181.btcentralplus.com [86.181.100.58]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s17sm68612930bkd.22.2010.04.01.10.04.51 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 01 Apr 2010 10:04:51 -0700 (PDT) From: David Leverton To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] pkg_pretend USE validation and VALID_USE alternative Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:04:48 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <20100331092035.GA11663@hrair> <20100401114907.5ab3fe67@snowmobile> <20100401111827.GM11663@hrair> In-Reply-To: <20100401111827.GM11663@hrair> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <201004011804.49097.levertond@googlemail.com> X-Archives-Salt: bc664fec-8aaa-4d9e-8503-64fbc9403cae X-Archives-Hash: 41f00d0a847e04e77c6c14df61ead28b On Thursday 01 April 2010 12:18:27 Brian Harring wrote: > It's a bit brief and likely left out an insult or two If anyone's been personal and insulting in this discussion, it isn't Ciaran. I've seen this attitude on IRC too. Funnily enough, you don't speak for other people, you don't decide what their opinions are, and you don't get to decree that they're insulting you (or worse, that they're /going to/ insult you) unless they are, in fact, insulting you. As for the topic: the only real concern about VALID_USE that I've seen from anyone is about whether Portage can implement it reasonably soon. Since some people think it can, how about picking some reasonable time period (allowing for bikeshedding about the syntax, of course), and if VALID_USE isn't supported in Portage by then but EAPI 4 is otherwise ready then we postpone VALID_USE until later?