From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Fgs6d-0003dZ-27 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 18 May 2006 23:40:35 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k4INd8Fe030496; Thu, 18 May 2006 23:39:08 GMT Received: from out3.smtp.messagingengine.com (out3.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4INXwoB030083 for ; Thu, 18 May 2006 23:33:59 GMT Received: from frontend3.internal (frontend3.internal [10.202.2.152]) by frontend1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBAD5D62A2F for ; Thu, 18 May 2006 19:33:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by frontend3.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 18 May 2006 19:33:58 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: dGDPEmqi9iBnAdFFEi9SHDjAymcXw5c6zZM0Izz2iQc6 1147995237 Received: from [192.168.1.1] (82-71-33-97.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.71.33.97]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95A4511AB for ; Thu, 18 May 2006 19:33:57 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <446D0464.2000306@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 00:33:56 +0100 From: Mike Auty User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060501) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles References: <20060516161549.442b4d8a@localhost> <200605182219.23040.pauldv@gentoo.org> <20060518212421.182423b8@snowdrop.home> <200605182239.57232.pauldv@gentoo.org> <446CE468.3050301@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <446CE468.3050301@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 4ebc7cf4-17e2-4cb6-b45c-7292f03d4c01 X-Archives-Hash: bced5fa38da559bbff7e1f332e9c6765 Perhaps, The problem here is that the paludis team appear to have a conflict of interests due to their previous and/or current association with Gentoo. I know they've mentioned personal grudges, so despite not knowing who these people are, I'm going to assume they have a history with Gentoo. However, were a new package manager (such as Conary) to request on the Gentoo Developer list that the tree be changed to make their package manager would work slightly better, I have no doubt that they would meet a similarly mixed resistance. Whilst there may not be an easily explained technical reason not to make the change, there is no compelling reason *to* make the change either. Most likely the response to this message will be that Paludis isn't the same as Conary, and that it could eventually take over from portage. However, other portage replacements (such as pkgcore and the seemingly forgotten portage-C) have not required changes to the tree. No promises were made to the Paludis team concerning changes to the tree (as far as I'm aware), and I don't see how any external package management system could build their software *assuming* that they could eventually influence a distribution's package library. I am perfectly happy for Paludis to innovate in whatever manner it deems necessary, just as I am for Conary to develop, but (at the moment) as external entities to Gentoo. Hopefully the council meeting will clear all of this up, and I look forward to reading their decision... Mike 5:) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list