From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ihjcm-0004SY-RV for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:26:09 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.1/8.14.0) with SMTP id l9GAF5hX013500; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:15:05 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.1/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l9GAF4cO013488 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:15:05 GMT Received: from gentoo.org (c-67-171-150-177.hsd1.or.comcast.net [67.171.150.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C5E653F9 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:15:01 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 03:15:00 -0700 From: Donnie Berkholz To: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-science] sci team help Message-ID: <20071016101459.GU23990@supernova> References: <1192473542.9282.74.camel@zeca> <20071015201410.GJ23990@supernova> <20071016072030.GS23990@supernova> <20071016100438.GA4220@zealot> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-science@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071016100438.GA4220@zealot> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-Archives-Salt: f3054ed7-425a-44cc-a929-29295adc3e7e X-Archives-Hash: e21b51504995415645affc5ed8a6660d On 13:04 Tue 16 Oct , Jukka Ruohonen wrote: > Somehow, I feel, personally, that the sci-packages should constitute > an exception from the general rules regarding overlays. I mean that > when a person chooses to use something from, say, Xfce overlay, the > use of an overlay is rather natural and pleasant, but when a person is > "forced" to use an overlay in order to write a Ph.D thesis, the use of > an overlay can be far from pleasant. In my opinion overlays can not > escape additional concerns regarding quality and trust, and these > concerns are much more strongly felt when we are dealing with > scientific packages. Again the keyword may just be the perception. "keyword" is the key word. If we were to do this, we'd have to manage the keywords and masking more carefully (or at all!) in the overlays. That gives a better indication of quality than the arbitrary assumption of "portage tree good, overlay bad" that we have now. Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list