From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-2142-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04F19138010
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:02:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A7D8021C039
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:02:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-pb0-f53.google.com (mail-pb0-f53.google.com [209.85.160.53])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C591121C249
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 12:12:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pbcwz12 with SMTP id wz12so5616844pbc.40
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 05:12:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version
:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
bh=PY3Z/EmTUN7LZMokG59miudaNieE2wqiAc/Ppl14TU4=;
b=h13Y7OaSmzXz4nL1ZgCkBScEAPfqupB9FdbJgmiUkdu2wk2wmV/4HhXFKH3Gr8mtPL
ZyqHKlY028fXq57YHzyoPmoDre221O+vUc0zzpQPCIGG0FvHWPbbZsmRsg2+yGqvnaG/
PyZk257f9loG2Si30OpE22c0dof0Hvf2lomkfqR5O20HJUmIUFmqp94CAbD8VQnj6UGa
zQohcWVp8e8R/ST95gei4k7KUoIq6LIu0TCuPP+cISrirD5BkqzQ8Ll95AfjaE6pq2ZT
A+ka2iVlE3wHMUo7ortabNdLDMUJ65QIsxpfLrC5mYU4BGwWdj/zdnP3+txosQh5boCk
In3Q==
Received: by 10.66.88.1 with SMTP id bc1mr16990250pab.18.1348834339079;
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 05:12:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.gmail.com:587 (74-95-192-101-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [74.95.192.101])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id kj10sm5498245pbc.72.2012.09.28.05.12.16
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 05:12:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by smtp.gmail.com:587 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 28 Sep 2012 05:12:15 -0700
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 05:12:15 -0700
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
Message-ID: <20120928121215.GC9751@localhost>
References: <20120925092414.GL37574@gentoo.org>
<20577.32914.7474.976710@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
<20579.61409.451891.521881@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
<20120927221336.GB9751@localhost>
<20580.60366.622706.627627@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20580.60366.622706.627627@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Archives-Salt: a4d34588-67f9-4809-a274-c4bb4d80ff48
X-Archives-Hash: 52990e6559e07713526d8e3a6d58f87c
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