From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3969F13877A for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2014 15:58:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BDFE6E08EC; Sat, 9 Aug 2014 15:58:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF36DE08E6 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2014 15:58:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from android-636e6ba793f72567 (114.sub-70-192-208.myvzw.com [70.192.208.114]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: creffett) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3EB7B3402FA for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2014 15:58:27 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <425f57d3-acd6-4b99-9780-ba9ca44f2295@email.android.com> References: <53e4ccbd.c2b4700a.3bec.2414@mx.google.com> <53e501be.845f700a.598f.2ad0@mx.google.com> <53e53883.a5e0980a.6062.2fd6@mx.google.com> <53e636b3.0cec980a.031d.4213@mx.google.com> <425f57d3-acd6-4b99-9780-ba9ca44f2295@email.android.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-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge From: Chris Reffett Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2014 11:58:23 -0400 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: X-Archives-Salt: f6d9c74f-3884-46f3-b369-20c18100a7e5 X-Archives-Hash: 6dc3b09647da5c6babc7a25b6dacc738 On August 9, 2014 11:46:54 AM EDT, Chris Reffett wrote: >On August 9, 2014 10:56:49 AM EDT, Igor wrote: >[snip] >>Just the main blockers are: >> >>- Somebody has to implement this technology >>- That requires time and effort >>- People have to be convinced of its value >>- Integration must happen at some level somehow somewhere in the >>portage toolchain(s) >>- People must opt in to this technology in order for the reports to >>happen >>- And only then can this start to deliver meaningful results. >> >> >> >>IMHO seriously, it could be done if ONLY portage dev team would >>implement >>an interface CAPABLE for HTTP reporting. Once the interface is there >>but turned off >>by default - server side statistics are feasible. Personally I don't >>see any future of >>this system unless it's coded in portage. Today - portage support >>without server side >>- tomorrow - server side. > >Then write it. Portage's source is available to anyone. I remember that >you were on this list earlier this year pushing for "Portage QOS" or >something. Keep in mind what a significant number of people told you >then: first, if you want to make some change, just do it and show us >what you have, rather than asking for votes and permission and changes. >Second, repeatedly saying "we should have (some feature)" doesn't work >if the people who would do the work (the portage team) don't see value >in it. From the general response on the list, I would say this is the >case. This means that if you want the feature, write it and come back >with an implementation, since complaining about it is getting you >nowhere. > >Chris Reffett Apologies for multiple emails getting sent, on a mobile connection here and it reported a failure to send. My bad. Chris Reffett -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.