From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from rproxy.gmail.com (rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.196])
by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j5BGLUxw025643
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:21:30 GMT
Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id f1so487994rne
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 09:21:38 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=beta; d=gmail.com;
h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
b=MLVPA1MzZbJ1sCpMs8PBqYyy2X05QLdSfhwdWzgaxUOnw/qObOLZAZO5q07D++gRAeNiFIat4U64vwdKIpC+vNtlBhEnI6jo+rhPue4ShKGSPnzkzmfHKj9IYeTLtG4CicED6jJ4jqRGQcxa7CHH/1a9UY7oabiyyE5GLc3Xw+Y=
Received: by 10.38.9.1 with SMTP id 1mr162519rni;
Sat, 11 Jun 2005 08:21:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.39.1.73 with HTTP; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 08:21:38 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5e0a35ef05061108217348b74b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 09:21:38 -0600
From: Joshua Baergen <joshuabaergen@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ekeyword and ordering
In-Reply-To: <1118479689.13125.52.camel@rivendell>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20050606222623.GI9084@kaf.zko.hp.com>
<200506101233.33994.vapier@gentoo.org>
<1118477722.13125.44.camel@rivendell>
<200506111728.26960.jstubbs@gentoo.org>
<1118479689.13125.52.camel@rivendell>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by robin.gentoo.org id j5BGLUxw025643
X-Archives-Salt: 978e7151-94a2-4164-bad8-f717b319e3f1
X-Archives-Hash: 29fcda758a9ef024728d77f4b79b9419
On 6/11/05, foser <foser@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-06-11 at 17:28 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > By lack of policy?
>
> Well I'm sort of concerned by the fact that I have to state the obvious,
> but really by people reordering them for no reason.
>
> It's not the lack of policy that is the problem here, it's the use of
> some self defined not uniform policy. There was no need for policy or
> regulation until some people set their own rules to play by, I really
> don't understand why that move gets defended by anyone.
>
> - foser
>
>
> BodyID:123219267.2.n.logpart (stored separately)
>
>
But if the policy doesn't exist there is no reason for new developers
to play by the current rules. The mentor certainly doesn't have to
mention it because it's not policy, it's not stated anywhere on the
devrel guide (unless I missed that section - it's certainly not within
the variable description section of the ebuild guide).
My point is that unless it's made policy there is no reason to expect
that everyone's going to follow what even a group of people consider
logical order. Personally, if I'm looking through keywords, I don't
care what order they're in. It's not like there are 100 keywords or
something, it should take a person paying attention long to look
through them and pick out any errors. Therefore, I would not really
care what order I put the keywords in unless someone told me, "This is
the order to put them in."
I don't think people "set their own rules to play by" in spite of the
rules, but rather because they didn't know there were any.
--
Joshua Baergen
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list