Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-08-12

[hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>]

Michael Palimaka:
> On 08/02/2014 12:35 AM, hasufell wrote:
>> Rich Freeman:
>>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
>>> <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 1 Aug 2014 09:24:46 -0400
>>>> Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>>> The thing is, with @preserved-rebuild I don't have to run
>>>>> revdep-rebuild for the packages that either can't be or simply aren't
>>>>> migrated to slot operator deps.  That is a huge win.  Also, random
>>>>> things aren't broken during the time that I'm rebuilding, so I don't
>>>>> end up chrooting into my system from a rescue CD when I forget to run
>>>>> revdep-rebuild.  I'll be happy when the day comes when we can get rid
>>>>> of it, but that day is not yet here.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, like dynamic dependencies, there's a vicious feedback
>>>> cycle of increasingly ugly hacks with preserved-rebuild.
>>>
>>> No argument there at all.  Hence my statement that I'll be happy when
>>> the day comes when I can be rid of it.
>>>
>>
>> Rich, this is a _fundamental_ problem we have in gentoo. It's the lack
>> of a development model.
> 
> It's also one of Gentoo's strengths. Please draft a document and present
> it to the Council if you would like to change it.
> 
> 

Absolutely not.

The development model is within the scope of a specific project, so the
portage team can decide what model they want to follow.