From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K75xK-00070o-DF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:52:26 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3D9ADE0469; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:52:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailhub-lb2.unibe.ch (mailhub-lb2.unibe.ch [130.92.0.83]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBEB0E0469 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:52:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (scanhub-lb2.unibe.ch [130.92.5.66]) by mailhub-lb2.unibe.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90CB8C4477 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:52:23 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-checked: by University of Bern - Mailgateway Received: from mailhub-lb2.unibe.ch ([130.92.0.83]) by localhost (scanhub-lb2.unibe.ch [130.92.5.66]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id v5H8FIXOCZVN for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:52:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from asterix.unibe.ch (asterix.unibe.ch [130.92.64.4]) by mailhub-lb2.unibe.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31BD5C44A2 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:52:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [130.92.65.87] (cubert [130.92.65.87]) by asterix.unibe.ch (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m5D9qLVA027553 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:52:21 +0200 (MEST) Message-ID: <4852437E.1090809@dev.gentooexperimental.org> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:53:02 +0200 From: Patrick Lauer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080505) 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June] References: <20080611070618.54E4066E24@smtp.gentoo.org> <20080612212148.GB14670@basestar> <200806122258.26896.levertond@googlemail.com> <75f3dce80806121813y5d417574kb7283c285e296562@mail.gmail.com> <20080613062612.46931b33@googlemail.com> <4852375F.7010201@dev.gentooexperimental.org> <7DB0FAE7-6F92-43D5-BB33-0048403A0281@gentoo.org> <48523AEF.2020608@dev.gentooexperimental.org> <20080613102240.4ba5d144@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <20080613102240.4ba5d144@googlemail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: d45d5496-05f8-4fc8-b3ca-1080c151546a X-Archives-Hash: f08d28dbfea56fb896814de3dad1d914 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:16:31 +0200 > Patrick Lauer wrote: > >>> Yes, we are aware of that bug in a feature we consider highly >>> experimental. >>> >> Hmm, I'd have guessed config files are moderately relevant. >> > > You didn't notice the large warning telling you not to use Portage > config files? > I did. But how else can I compare things or move back to portage if I don't like it? >> And why don't y'all fix a bug like that? >> > > We do what PMS requires regarding handling of inline comments (which is > the same as what some EAPI 0 accepting Portage versions do, so PMS > can't allow inline comments), and indicate an error (rather than > writing junk, as older Portage did) when inline comments are used. > So you say the thing you wrote excludes things you don't like so you can claim things by referencing it as authoritative. Does anyone else think that maybe there's a slight conflict of interest there? I hope that PMS, as it stands now, does not become a standard. It is obviously very leaky and ignores issues so that you can claim PMS compatibility without being compatible to each other. -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list