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 1R4Z0J-0003ap-6E for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:02:55 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4933421C2C1; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:02:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1981C21C2A4 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:02:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (213-238-104-87.adsl.inetia.pl [213.238.104.87]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 948901B4013; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:02:10 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 16:04:08 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: dberkholz@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] new `usex` helper Message-ID: <20110916160408.787ffcc9@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <20110916123014.GC5000@comet> References: <201109131756.19714.vapier@gentoo.org> <20110914020228.GP31178@comet> <20110914021449.GA5106@localhost.hobnob.com> <20110914191641.GQ31178@comet> <20110915002949.GA16239@localhost> <20110916030019.GA5000@comet> <20110916090605.GD16239@localhost> <20110916123014.GC5000@comet> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.10 (GTK+ 2.24.6; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/fD6=JQjreaT6awfnp+7nFQU"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 773901ee0de7d11c71f98201b7759c75 --Sig_/fD6=JQjreaT6awfnp+7nFQU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 07:30:14 -0500 Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > Realistically I assume you're taking the stance "EAPI gets in the > > way, lets do away with it"- if so, well, out with it, and I'll > > dredge up the old logs/complaints that lead to EAPI. >=20 > I see EAPI as a nice thing for standardizing features that are=20 > implemented in the PM so they work identically across portage, > pkgcore, and paludis. But I don't think that implementing things in > the PM when they could go in an eclass is automatically the best > choice. It dramatically slows down the speed of iteration, > prototyping, and bug fixing. What is more important is that it takes the code further from devs. I like to see the code I use, and be able to do anything about it if necessary. Not to see a spec and three different implementation, of which two use random hacks which I can't do anything about unless I start to implement PM-specific anti-hacks in my code. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/fD6=JQjreaT6awfnp+7nFQU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAk5zV1sACgkQfXuS5UK5QB3F7gP/XGBh6Og2KzBW0OvkukvuXNOi n27yfw/fbTJEMWG2BAamEmEunz3NGsDvlxCPQoQDQ/cuCCR4P0rGNe9apMVE9onL FJw/ccWteco5Grc2FNKcrp7sYny7C5qx00MgQOycFSYor3eIdoVFI9p078CPuEEK uWXHU8uwmFqlW+4seOQ= =xj6D -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/fD6=JQjreaT6awfnp+7nFQU--