From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-54853-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5FF0138010
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 06:58:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DF68921C02C;
	Wed, 19 Sep 2012 06:57:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EAA821C02A
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 06:56:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-pb0-f53.google.com (mail-pb0-f53.google.com [209.85.160.53])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: mattst88)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69B3233CEDC
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 06:56:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pbbrp16 with SMTP id rp16so1238876pbb.40
        for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:56:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.66.78.6 with SMTP id x6mr4571945paw.41.1348037770226; Tue, 18
 Sep 2012 23:56:10 -0700 (PDT)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.5.10 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:55:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20569.26587.854629.81369@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
References: <20120916135211.GC23030@localhost> <20120918102551.500ff19b@pomiocik.lan>
 <20120918092426.GA5384@localhost> <20568.16682.31115.233591@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
 <20120918110637.GF5384@localhost> <20568.25833.33593.344770@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
 <CAAr7Pr8ZWeLwECYrf0MXvUTERTvf_TiXHE7RtLsUK+7WJ6K+aQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB9SyzS_RcyX7MnuuBHVNRXSzGMKM0E_PeRP1dBVSOgVSBYG3A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEdQ38GzkHjqoO19fWO-qUQse2ieCYoZ49So_3Osr=SnU=v4Sw@mail.gmail.com> <20569.26587.854629.81369@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
From: Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:55:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEdQ38EPp7aOqgXpFwj3=otAa6QAkTvaNPMJt0=g1xVHptQSiw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP: gentoo sync based unified deps proposal
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: 1005c9ec-a45e-441a-b7e7-1fe267036e7c
X-Archives-Hash: f2c543a26c8ca6d92078245d91ad9664

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:36 PM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, Matt Turner wrote:
>
>> From the other thread ("example conversion of gentoo-x86 current
>> deps to unified dependencies"):
>
> [Sorry, I've missed this one in the other thread, so replying here.]
>
>>> 4) It is not exherbo's DEPENDENCIES. Meaning it is not label based.
>>> Meaning you do not need to knee-jerk attack it because of some
>>> notion it's ciaran based/related.
>
> What kind of reasoning is this? Does it mean that the syntax was
> deliberately changed to make it different from exherbo's?
>
> We should accept (or reject) things based on their technical merits,
> not because of ad-hominem or "not invented here" arguments.
>
> Ulrich
>

Brian was mocking how so many people reject anything Ciaran proposes
out of hand. He actually discussed the reasoning why he doesn't
actually like labels in another thread.