From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58BAF1381F3 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 07:10:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9B68FE0908; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 07:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE13CE08D9 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 07:10:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (static-81-219-167-27.devs.futuro.pl [81.219.167.27]) (using SSLv3 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CCD8433E67D; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 07:10:09 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 09:11:16 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Cc: hasufell@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Questions for Candidates (was: Questioning/Interviewing council nominees) Message-ID: <20130625091116.63bdd157@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <51C8C7EB.5090301@gentoo.org> References: <51BF597B.6060600@gentoo.org> <51C7688A.2020103@gentoo.org> <51C77DD6.3090700@gentoo.org> <51C8C7EB.5090301@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.1 (GTK+ 2.24.19; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA512; boundary="Sig_/39LOzoXqhWSf9AI_KGdMO6K"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 37981f89-f379-419b-9ea0-3363d995e63d X-Archives-Hash: 788827e55b8e1eca3630a9f3c5d12daf --Sig_/39LOzoXqhWSf9AI_KGdMO6K Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dnia 2013-06-25, o godz. 00:27:55 hasufell napisa=C5=82(a): > On 06/24/2013 12:59 AM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: > > The dev manual doesn't believe this is implicit nor without any > > consensus. True, it doesn't ban you from adding a new eclass, but it > > doesn't say you can just go and randomly add new eclasses without > > discussion either. >=20 > I know the devmanual quite well. The example in it's procedure was a bit > more complex than you are describing, so I don't see how that adds anythi= ng. >=20 > People agreed that the eclass is fine, but there was no real consensus > about the question whether we actually want an eclass based solution. > You can't have both, because it does not make sense. At one point you > have to decide, council did nothing to aid in this heated (really > heated) discussion. Wasn't there? I can think of the two people being really unhappy with it (guess why), a few more being unsure or indifferent. You can't get all the people to be happy. I'm really sorry that you're unhappy with the solution we've put our work into. But I'd really appreciate if you two stopped undermining it, 'spreading FUD' and accepted the fact that -- even if the eclass-based solution didn't get a 'real consensus' -- yours wouldn't get even that close to it. And I'm sad that you can't keep it professional. I'm doing my best to help you with multilib-portage. It's an out-of-tree project which is not officially supported, yet I hack the eclass to keep it working. And I don't get anything for it, really, just more blustering [dictionary translation, meaning may have been lost]. That said, I don't know what the Council could or should do. Should the Council be responsible for reading discussions and grabbing whether there was a consensus or not? Or making one in the name of the whole community? Last but not least, I don't even know if there were *two* solutions proposed. It seems a bit like it's between *a working solution now*, and not doing anything and waiting till you get it anywhere near official acceptance. Note that the timeframe and willingness of people to work on it is an important point as well. And likeliness that everything breaks apart when people touch multilib.eclass. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/39LOzoXqhWSf9AI_KGdMO6K Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJRyUKYXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1RUJGMjBGOTk2RkIzQzIyQ0M2RkNBNDBC QUJGMUQ1RkY4QzgxMTBBAAoJELq/HV/4yBEK21kQAIgy/RVHjpykSBuOeDTqaZnS dzzgmRIqfVGxNuMpqhK7U5s950v30VW0kk5iRUsxTsQNehvZEdBlAs/Yuva4UHw4 LjDMdYVIfW75VBC04TOfJhBQwTjZ4PIoYQxGUdmW/4SsnHANvJamUws/Nyh91h0y Yulpi2IvdL6ycSKT30KYDpKpi/4ME9ZKiyDVXQw+IaA5Ze6lWdbcvlxJLmIpkCH2 ec27GkD+jwg1laxWtVfEagsvxJoErHbwE9jtQTDVdekUH4zEiS6Rwsv2kMyaOW83 +fcZ13cWPtqKPDEaf9/aPrgOzUok5JIes49s3v2IbkESK8LYVBYNUjRUY9VD2CXO Ny7P1yBouI6cK90RuESy5VOaN18j3JMWs0tpFTf6oa326U8PNXC0kxewGrNupysb JZ6VKRaH+ajKv5U2/4BEb6ZKe8+E8NY6d3hciqEx7yGZvMzogdEau6hBfHnbNqMY MGpH5sKpDCZtmvdH04j2wDZrO3S4Lx7GdWnaWY11IuluGPZDRTRI489DtfrsmZdG je9uUK8JYxkTdMCuVrWMPrVZKuVhFv/ucl8wc/+ATCfF35hK3oFC5XktmFsSAGbb lETwhT7WXCnTleQ4cxzjmfc7e6COh41gv9/gAQkqVKi0kLTeWTJaSQh5LY8hD828 7Vw25u0PqkD3vG+Ro2ip =SAuQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/39LOzoXqhWSf9AI_KGdMO6K--