From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2A1E138247 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:14:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 87519E0D02; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:14:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from foo.stuge.se (foo.stuge.se [212.116.89.98]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6978CE0C4D for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:14:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 21483 invoked by uid 501); 10 Jan 2014 17:14:48 -0000 Message-ID: <20140110171448.21482.qmail@stuge.se> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 18:14:48 +0100 From: Peter Stuge To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Question, Portage QOS Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <52d02460.431c980a.17aa.ffffad03@mx.google.com> 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=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52d02460.431c980a.17aa.ffffad03@mx.google.com> X-Archives-Salt: 02b34acf-7795-4fac-9627-fc294b7bff37 X-Archives-Hash: 7db9c9b850dd3cd3838285625310bac3 Igor wrote: > Let's agree on following - I'll design the system in details on paper. > When it's ready (~ 1.5 months) I'll get back here and share the details. You might be surprised how little people care about good design. They choose kindof-working implementation every time. //Peter