From: Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 09-10-2012
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 05:12:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120928121215.GC9751@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20580.60366.622706.627627@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 02:14:06AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012, Brian Harring wrote:
>
> tl;dr
>
> > Shorter version; you very clearly left out option C; "leave it as is
> > since PMS is filled with warts, this isn't hurting anything, and
> > changing it will break things."
>
> Problems aren't solved by ignoring them. ;-)
True. They also multiply if in trying to solve them, you ignore the
issues of the problem. :P
> The point is that currently PMS and Portage behaviour disagree.
> I think this is not acceptable, otherwise we could as well give up on
> the PMS and take the Portage implementation as the reference.
Yeah, I'm being a bit cracky in biting your head off on this one if
this is specifically all you're trying to address; discussions I've
been seeing for this one were to drop the disallowance of -\d$,
which... per my statements, are borkage inducing; combine that with
the fact theres been a lot of "lets just ignore borkage" proposals
lately, and I'm being fairly aggressive/noisy about stopping that.
First thought, that rule was added because portage was buggy
internally... none of us actually needed it except portage. Portage
internals now no longer have the underlying flaw that led to it, but
instead they've gone and cocked it up so the rules are tighter than
what PMS requires; honestly, I'd be inclined to make portage clean up
their own mess rather than keep changing the spec for stuff like this-
largely out of spite/annoyance. Not exactly great for users however.
Unfortunately, this has been in since at lease cec3c5 (02/10) for
diffball-1a. Plus the world isn't that nice I suspect
Currently, the only way such a package would get in is via pkgcore or
paludis... ie... a PMS compliant manager. Sucks, but if we're going
to do anything, we have to tighten the spec, which will be annoying
for parse speeds (version rules aren't the simplest to apply).
I truly hate having to do that also.
Either way, this angle, have at it, just thought this was another
"lets drop -\d$ disallowance" proposal, thus the hefty "ah man, not
this shit again" email.
~harring
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-28 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-25 9:24 [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 09-10-2012 Fabian Groffen
2012-09-25 9:59 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-27 6:19 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-27 22:13 ` Brian Harring
2012-09-28 0:14 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-28 12:12 ` Brian Harring [this message]
2012-10-03 5:04 ` Donnie Berkholz
2012-10-03 6:44 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-10-03 6:56 ` Matt Turner
2012-10-03 8:31 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-29 15:51 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-09-29 16:04 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-09-29 16:10 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-09-25 19:32 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-02 11:30 ` Fabian Groffen
2012-10-03 17:18 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-04 18:32 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-05 6:28 ` Fabian Groffen
2012-10-05 6:41 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-05 6:43 ` Patrick Lauer
2012-10-05 8:46 ` Ulrich Mueller
2012-10-05 10:31 ` Rich Freeman
2012-10-05 14:51 ` Jeff Horelick
2012-10-05 17:35 ` Pacho Ramos
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120928121215.GC9751@localhost \
--to=ferringb@gmail.com \
--cc=gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox