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 1M8KO5-0005tU-34 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:33:42 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E6B3BE03B0; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:33:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C060EE03B0 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:33:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75CFC66ADC for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:33:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -0.875 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.875 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.657, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WHckHqnsttt4 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:33:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DB5966B07 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:33:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1M8KNq-0005dF-32 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:33:26 +0000 Received: from 82.152.195.85 ([82.152.195.85]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:33:26 +0000 Received: from slong by 82.152.195.85 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:33:26 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Steven J Long Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Allow bash-4.0 features in EAPI="3" ebuilds Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 21:31:56 +0100 Organization: Friendly-Coders Message-ID: <2994439.2hv7UABkEb@news.friendly-coders.info> References: <200905171820.27340.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <200905201912.56509.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <20090520190043.1ab9c1bf@snowcone> <200905211957.55040.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <20090521190059.04de1d55@snowcone> 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.152.195.85 Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: f324a8be-892c-4f7c-80fb-bf6eefc26013 X-Archives-Hash: a74407ed10ac0f926f1381d77ef1fde0 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 21 May 2009 19:57:49 +0200 > Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: >> > We always have to assume that there might not be an up to date >> > cache. The Gentoo rsync mirrors do not always ship up to date cache, >> > particularly if someone's just changed a widely used eclass. >> >> Users can wait an hour and run `emerge --sync` again. > > ...but that's not what happens. Instead, the users get their screen > spammed with annoying messages, Er I think you're confusing paludis and portage. > get confused and run to bugzilla in droves. > Nice to see you have such a high opinion of our users. IME users are more than happy to wait a bit and sync. I agree there's work crying out to be done to make things more convenient. Your GLEPs don't begin to address those issues, unfortunately. Here, this sums up what's wrong with most of your cockamamy ideas (as attractive, and oh so right, as they may seem to you now): http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/taoup/html/ch01s07.html To paraphrase you: Go and read it and don't come back til you've actually understood the concepts. > This just takes us right back to the bad old days when changing > anything would result in mass user confusion. The whole 'EAPI' thing > wasn't an arbitrary whim. > Nor was it supposed to be a six-monthly dump to the list along with a whole slew of new, half-baked 'proposals' "everyone has to comply" with as "it's in PMS." Abuse of process doesn't make you right; it just makes you annoying. -- #friendly-coders -- We're friendly but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)