Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage Language

[Daniel Robbins <drobbins@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1828 bytes --]

On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 01:17, Jason Mobarak wrote:
> My opinion: Python. 

First: you live in Albuquerque? :)

> Arguments for Python
> --------------------

One of the things we are trying to do this time around is to have a very
professional, well-managed development process. That process involves
writing up (excuse the "*"'s) *requirements* before selecting an
implementation language. That is, we need to decide what our goals are
before we determine the best way to reach those goals. The prolog
prototype is meant to just explore possibilities... the portage-ng code
itself will not come from this prototype.

This also means that there has been a shift in our approach, after I got
some feedback from nerdboy. We're going with a requirements-first
approach for development.

> Also, I'm working on separating portage into packages, I feel a bit disconnected
> from other developers and I'm not sure if I should just scrap what I'm doing and
> wait for portage-ng development to get under way.

What is the portage-ng list? I don't think I'm on it.

The best thing to do right now is to assist in the effort described on
the portage project page:

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/

Specifically, the:

"24 Dec 2003
portage-ng: 
public initial comprehensive requirements and design goals document"

There is no community work happening yet because there have been no
efforts from the managers to foster community development, so I'm
jumping in to get things started.

What we need to do is figure out what the requirements of the system
should be. I'll post my initial list to this list and hopefully show you
what I'm looking for, and allow you to get the ball rolling.

> So, please, advice, comments, direction. :-)

Hopefully this'll help :)

Regards,

Daniel

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]