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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-40369-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1NxPJH-0003av-Pc
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:40:08 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D6D40E0983;
Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:40:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14E1EE0932
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:39:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-bw0-f219.google.com (mail-bw0-f219.google.com [209.85.218.219])
(using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B61A1B41C5
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:39:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by bwz19 with SMTP id 19so11497bwz.26
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 11:39:44 -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 10.204.74.163 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 11:39:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201004011804.49097.levertond@googlemail.com>
References: <20100331092035.GA11663@hrair> <20100401114907.5ab3fe67@snowmobile>
<20100401111827.GM11663@hrair>
<201004011804.49097.levertond@googlemail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:39:43 +0300
Received: by 10.204.131.80 with SMTP id w16mr1968792bks.35.1270147183459; Thu,
01 Apr 2010 11:39:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <s2o2becdd071004011139n5e9c70d0qaa6681020e3da19a@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] pkg_pretend USE validation and VALID_USE alternative
From: Dror Levin <spatz@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00151747bd94aed3f30483312fde
X-Archives-Salt: 936b470c-d610-46b9-8b1b-664714c57b44
X-Archives-Hash: 66d923ba9f0ced730cb106165b544c1d
--00151747bd94aed3f30483312fde
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 20:04, David Leverton <levertond@googlemail.com>wrote:
> If anyone's been personal and insulting in this discussion, it isn't
> Ciaran.
>
I'll take that as an April Fools' day joke.
> As for the topic: the only real concern about VALID_USE that I've seen from
> anyone is about whether Portage can implement it reasonably soon. Since
> some
> people think it can, how about picking some reasonable time period
> (allowing
> for bikeshedding about the syntax, of course), and if VALID_USE isn't
> supported in Portage by then but EAPI 4 is otherwise ready then we postpone
> VALID_USE until later?
>
Here's another suggestion: how about we don't impose any ridiculous
constraints on development and keep this discussion on the technological
side of the original proposal? If the only concerns are about the time it
will take to implement, then this suggestion must be perfect in all aspects
and so we should probably wait until it's done, even if is takes a loooong
time!
I really like this attitude, though. Once you're done criticizing the
technological aspects of some proposal you start raising concerns about how
hard it is to implement features for Portage, how long that takes, etc.
Well, since that's not really constructive, I suggest you keep those
concerns to yourself.
Dror Levin
--00151747bd94aed3f30483312fde
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 20:04, David Leverton <sp=
an dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:levertond@googlemail.com">levertond@go=
oglemail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" sty=
le=3D"margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);=
padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class=3D"im">
</div>If anyone's been personal and insulting in this discussion, it is=
n't Ciaran.<br></blockquote><div>I'll take that as an April Fools&#=
39; day joke.<br>=C2=A0<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D=
"margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padd=
ing-left: 1ex;">
As for the topic: the only real concern about VALID_USE that I've seen =
from<br>
anyone is about whether Portage can implement it reasonably soon. =C2=A0Sin=
ce some<br>
people think it can, how about picking some reasonable time period (allowin=
g<br>
for bikeshedding about the syntax, of course), and if VALID_USE isn't<b=
r>
supported in Portage by then but EAPI 4 is otherwise ready then we postpone=
<br>
VALID_USE until later?<br>
</blockquote></div>Here's another suggestion: how about we don't im=
pose any ridiculous constraints on development and keep this discussion on =
the technological side of the original proposal? If the only concerns are a=
bout the time it will take to implement, then this suggestion must be perfe=
ct in all aspects and so we should probably wait until it's done, even =
if is takes a loooong time!<br>
<br>I really like this attitude, though. Once you're done criticizing t=
he technological aspects of some proposal you start raising concerns about =
how hard it is to implement features for Portage, how long that takes, etc.=
<br>
Well, since that's not really constructive, I suggest you keep those co=
ncerns to yourself.<br><br>Dror Levin<br></div>
--00151747bd94aed3f30483312fde--