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 2E6971381F3 for ; Wed, 1 May 2013 17:27:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1E263E08A8; Wed, 1 May 2013 17:27:30 +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 739DDE089F for ; Wed, 1 May 2013 17:27:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.26.5] (ip98-164-195-43.oc.oc.cox.net [98.164.195.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zmedico) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6492F33E023 for ; Wed, 1 May 2013 17:27:28 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5181507F.5060602@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 10:27:27 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130402 Thunderbird/17.0.4 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 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-05-14 References: <517C03E8.7040406@gentoo.org> <5181325A.2030701@gentoo.org> <20130501162247.17bc7f11@googlemail.com> <20130501172802.0f9ef9ec@gentoo.org> <20130501163556.6ab95917@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <20130501163556.6ab95917@googlemail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: eedc523b-5208-4ee2-a13b-e28197b033bb X-Archives-Hash: 2ef5d3676bc042665bc0c1d9c35357ed On 05/01/2013 08:35 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 1 May 2013 17:28:02 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: >> On Wed, 1 May 2013 16:22:47 +0100 >> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 08:18:50 -0700 >>> Zac Medico wrote: >>>> I know that this feature has been questioned by some, especially >>>> by people involved with Paludis (which doesn't implement >>>> preserve-libs). I think that the main compliant is that >>>> preserve-libs doesn't preserve any non-library dependencies (such >>>> as configuration files) that a library may depend on. >>> >>> ...and that it's utterly frickin' broken as a concept, and that >>> adopting it will slow down people switching to the proper solution >>> to the problem, which is slots. >> >> Convince the developers to split packages into proper parts, then we >> can talk. Or even better, convince upstreams to split their packages. > > It's necessary, and the way to convince developers is to stop providing > a nasty hack as a not-really-working alternative. As downstream packagers, do we or can we really expect to have that much influence of upstream developers? If the big binary distros are willing to package these things without complaints, then how likely is it that upstream developers will change their ways? -- Thanks, Zac