From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16887 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2004 20:49:17 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 28 Oct 2004 20:49:17 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CNHCv-00085p-0e for arch-gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:49:17 +0000 Received: (qmail 3484 invoked by uid 89); 28 Oct 2004 20:48:58 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-portage-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail Reply-To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 18792 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2004 20:48:57 +0000 Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:52:47 -0500 From: Grant Goodyear To: GentooPortage Message-ID: <20041028205247.GA26136@server.grantgoodyear.org> Mail-Followup-To: GentooPortage References: <1098993757.9091.107.camel@www.toruslaptop.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="n8g4imXOkfNTN/H1" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1098993757.9091.107.camel@www.toruslaptop.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] webapp-config and webapps X-Archives-Salt: 8260e9cb-fb32-42fe-b541-391a41e7194d X-Archives-Hash: 068c559f0ed97349d1276bd854672822 --n8g4imXOkfNTN/H1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Wendall Cada wrote: [Thu Oct 28 2004, 03:02:38PM CDT] > I have, as do other Gentoo web-app developers that I'll leave unnamed > many ideas about how this could be done better. My input is pointless if > webapp-config is the way things are going to be done. It really negates > the usefulness of many other tools. Was a roadmap created? Was anybody > who uses this stuff asked? Was it mentioned that portage would just > manage the downloading from here on out? Why weren't these features if > necessary made a part of portage? The "roadmap" was, indeed, created, and discussed in length on the = =20 gentoo-dev mailing list. Take a look at GLEP 11 at glep.gentoo.org, = =20 and search one of the gentoo-dev list archives to see the entire = =20 discusion. = =20 = =20 If you have a better idea, please do feel free to write your own GLEP. = =20 Very little in Gentoo is ever set in stone, so if your idea is better = =20 than the current system, and you or somebody else is willing to provide = =20 the code to implement it, then the odds are high that it will be = =20 adopted. = =20 = =20 Best, = =20 g2boojum =20 --=20 Grant Goodyear=09 Gentoo Developer g2boojum@gentoo.org http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 --n8g4imXOkfNTN/H1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBgVwfptxxUuD2W3YRAmCVAJ4vFdv6lKaPUpQPGXMfREQHB9nxbgCggAs8 oxMe5go8jexbCKWQ06fkfD8= =Z6Lm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --n8g4imXOkfNTN/H1--