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 1OoMPJ-0008Qz-7L for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:17:13 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 82B42E0B1D; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:17:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vms173017pub.verizon.net (vms173017pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.17]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50E35E0AF6 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:16:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gw.thefreemanclan.net ([unknown] [96.245.231.248]) by vms173017.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0L7Q00A3H5NKULI3@vms173017.mailsrvcs.net> for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 15:16:37 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [192.168.0.5] (rich.homedns.org [192.168.0.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gw.thefreemanclan.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 787541759D34 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2010 16:16:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-id: <4C757A1D.1000901@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 16:16:29 -0400 From: Richard Freeman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.7) Gecko/20100727 Thunderbird/3.1.1 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: The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo References: <201007041630.07537.polynomial-c@gentoo.org> <4C7494BA.4040104@gentoo.org> <4C7546CE.3050002@gentoo.org> <201008251506.05605.vapier@gentoo.org> In-reply-to: <201008251506.05605.vapier@gentoo.org> Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 97572b17-1eaa-454c-9f09-78fb512a0f68 X-Archives-Hash: ae339b42cefa21e7b37c44baa01b2f70 On 08/25/2010 03:06 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday, August 25, 2010 12:37:34 Richard Freeman wrote: >> On 08/24/2010 11:57 PM, Nathan Zachary wrote: >>> If we are going to endorse using OpenRC, >>> the more relevant issues are the ones regarding its future development. >> >> Is the future development of OpenRC more problematic than the future >> development of baselayout-1? As far as I can tell, baselayout-1 never >> had an upstream, and never will have one. > > wtf are you talking about ? Gentoo was always been the upstream of it. > Uh, that was essentially my point... :) Clearly upstream support is not an issue that distinguishes openrc from baselayout-1. >> Wouldn't it make more sense to clean up openrc and get it deployed, even >> if in the long-term we decide to get rid of it? > > it's already cleaned up. this is the "squash regressions from baselayout-1 > and make sure all stable packages are happy with it" phase. And my point was essentially that we should finish doing that, and not bag the whole project because of the OpenRC upstream issues. Sure, we can think about the next great thing that is coming along, but let's not abandon the work done so far, because doing so means living with baselayout-1 for another few more years. I was just being a bit subtle in my argument... Rich