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 1KIB8L-00012X-T7 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 23:37:38 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E8B80E0249; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 23:37:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from yw-out-1718.google.com (yw-out-1718.google.com [74.125.46.154]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0DB2E024B for ; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 23:37:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 5so2126560ywm.46 for ; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 16:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.151.142.16 with SMTP id u16mr19277385ybn.164.1215992255422; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 16:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.202.13 with HTTP; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 16:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 16:37:35 -0700 From: "Alec Warner" Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting summary for 10 July 2008 In-Reply-To: <20080714002117.731f1408@googlemail.com> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080713071118.GC1891@comet> <20080713235255.0e2b7f8e@googlemail.com> <20080714002117.731f1408@googlemail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2cbd05b7467cf1f5 X-Archives-Salt: f99a21a4-51a5-4d4e-9a4c-81f6494497bd X-Archives-Hash: e98aad9040e8c328b005ad60e7761c56 On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 16:16:23 -0700 > "Alec Warner" wrote: >> As far as could be determined by the members at the meeting there no >> compelling examples in Gentoo who to change or add global scope >> functions in future EAPIs. As such those problems as stated are not >> in scope for Gentoo because Gentoo is not attempting to do those >> things at this time. > > You mean you don't want per-category/package eclasses, or eclasses that > can indicate that they only work with some EAPIs, or eclasses that can > indicate that they're being used incorrectly, or the death of > EXPORT_FUNCTIONS? All of these have been discussed as desirable future > extensions. I don't require any of those things, but maybe other people do and If so; they should probably come to the meeting or otherwise make themselves known because they were not at the previous meeting. The GLEP as written is not convincing; it doesn't say 'I am trying to do X with Gentoo and cannot because of this restriction.' It says 'In the future someone may want to do X and they won't be able to because of this restriction so lets try to remove the restriction now.' This is an admirable goal mind you; but it is my opinion that there are more concrete features that we could implement for benefits now rather than talk about what could be. I chatted briefly with peper on IRC about this (as he was the original GLEP author) so when he gets time he said he had some examples to provide. > > -- > Ciaran McCreesh > -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list