Seemant Kulleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Fri, 30 Mar 2007
15:28:52 -0400:
> On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 20:42 +0200, Matthias Langer wrote:
>
>
>> i don't think that personal issues should be taken into account when it
>> comes to choosing a new official packa
Hi,
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:28:52 -0400
Seemant Kulleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 20:42 +0200, Matthias Langer wrote:
>
> >
> > i don't think that personal issues should be taken into account
> > when it comes to choosing a new official package manager for gentoo.
>
> It
On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 14:53 +1200, Christopher Sawtell wrote:
> Correct, because the only way Ciaran can prove beyond doubt that his Paludis
> is a viable option is to see hundreds, nay millions, of people using it. I'm
> quite sure that he won't achieve that goal by bleating in here as frequent
On Saturday 31 March 2007, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 23:41 +0200, Danny van Dyk wrote:
> > > In which case your Paludis fork of Gentoo will take off like a
> >
> > Please, pretty please with sugar atop: Stop this FUD about forking
> > Gentoo. Paludis is not a fork of Gentoo, it
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 23:41 +0200, Danny van Dyk wrote:
> > In which case your Paludis fork of Gentoo will take off like a
> Please, pretty please with sugar atop: Stop this FUD about forking
> Gentoo. Paludis is not a fork of Gentoo, it's new package manager. The
> relation between Portage and
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 22:22 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Paludis is a package manager, not a distribution. And no, the GPL does
> not mean there's nothing to lose -- the Zynot fork did a fair bit of
> damage to Gentoo, and no-one wants a repeat of that mess...
Only in terms of morale. In fact
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 21:23:32 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You seem to be under the misapprehension that Portage == Gentoo.
>
> No no, I'm saying that at present Portage is one of Gentoo's most
> severe limiting factors.
Then kindly stop interchanging Portage with Gentoo wh
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 21:03:14 -0400
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But you're not addressing the issue. If the Council requests a new
> > feature in Portage, will it happen?
>
> if the Council felt the need to force something in, then yes, it
> would happen
For how many more years d
On Friday 30 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Instead, you have to worry about Gentoo infra people pulling commit
> access under the guise of 'security measures' and refusing devrel
> requests to restore it.
agreed, that was complete bs ... it has since been rectified
> But you're not address
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 20:29:46 -0400
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > - the official package manager of Gentoo would need to be
> > > completely "in-house" with respect to control, direction, etc...
> >
> > Justify that. What does being in-house have to do with having
> > control? Are
On Friday 30 March 2007, Anant Narayanan wrote:
> The logic is flawed. I don't understand why Gentoo can't switch to
> paludis so long as there are "in-house" Gentoo developers ready to
> maintain and support it.
that is your opinion. mine is that the official package manager must be led
and mai
On Friday 30 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > - you are not wanted as an official Gentoo developer ... the past
> > clearly shows this
>
> Not really... The process by which I became an unofficial Gentoo
> developer was so flawed that it got replaced as a result...
sure, the first time ...
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 00:21:01 +0100
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > For the curious, Paludis non-compliance is being tracked at [2]. So
> > far as I'm aware, there's no central list for Portage or Pkgcore
> > non-compliance.
> >
> Nice doc. I'm guessing that you ha
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> For the curious, Paludis non-compliance is being tracked at [2]. So far
> as I'm aware, there's no central list for Portage or Pkgcore
> non-compliance.
>
Nice doc. I'm guessing that you have a list of Portage's non-compliance?
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Anant Narayanan wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On 31-Mar-07, at 2:21 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> not really, why dont you apply some of your logic:
>> - you are not wanted as an official Gentoo developer ... the past
>> clearly
>> shows this
>> - the official package manager of Gentoo would need to be
>
Hi Mike,
On 31-Mar-07, at 2:21 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
not really, why dont you apply some of your logic:
- you are not wanted as an official Gentoo developer ... the past
clearly
shows this
- the official package manager of Gentoo would need to be
completely "in-house" with respect to co
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> perhaps we should write a new func ... `dorcaddon` ...
That immediately looks like "dork addon" to me.
--dirtypics
--
where to now? if i had to guess
dirtyepic gentoo orgi'm afraid to say antarctica's next
9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB
On Friday 30 March 2007, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> On 3/30/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > the middle ground we're taking it is to leave these things in portage but
> > masked with the clear message "if it breaks, you fix it; dont bother the
> > games team without a fix"
>
> OK, I t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Paul de Vrieze kirjoitti:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Me and my wife and son are moving to Australia. We are now waiting for
the visa's to arrive, and after that will need some time to set
ourselves up. Our computers however are being shippe
>>> It depends upon the degree to which one specifies 'sendmail
>>> compatibility'. Does it mean "shares some of the same commandline
>>> options" or "shares exactly the same configuration file format and
>>> all bugs and produces identical output"?
>> I think Mike mentioned compatiblebinaries. Not
On 3/30/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
the middle ground we're taking it is to leave these things in portage but
masked with the clear message "if it breaks, you fix it; dont bother the
games team without a fix"
OK, I thought the intention was to remove it from the tree. When I'm
Paul de Vrieze kirjoitti:
> Hi all,
>
> Me and my wife and son are moving to Australia. We are now waiting for the
> visa's to arrive, and after that will need some time to set ourselves up. Our
> computers however are being shipped as we speak and will only arive in
> australia after roughly 6
Am Freitag, 30. März 2007 23:13 schrieb Christopher Sawtell:
> On Saturday 31 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 21:13:18 +0100
> >
> > Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:50:59 +0100
> > >
> > > Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 09:13:10 +1200
Christopher Sawtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In which case your Paludis fork of Gentoo will take off like a
> scalded cat, and the world will come racing to your door begging for
> your Mk II version of Gentoo. Go for it, the GPL ensures that you
> have nothin
On Saturday 31 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 21:13:18 +0100
>
> Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:50:59 +0100
> >
> > Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > A few years ago Gentoo had some serious advantages over the
> > > competi
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 16:51:54 -0400
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 30 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Gentoo's lack of progress is an extremely relevant issue...
>
> dont push your own agendas under the guise that Gentoo is lacking
> progress
Don't push your own agend
On Friday 30 March 2007, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 20:42 +0200, Matthias Langer wrote:
> > i don't think that personal issues should be taken into account when it
> > comes to choosing a new official package manager for gentoo.
>
> It's relevant in that people have to work with
On Friday 30 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Gentoo's lack of progress is an extremely relevant issue...
dont push your own agendas under the guise that Gentoo is lacking progress
> > to start with, Paludis will never be an official package manager for
> > Gentoo so long as you are heavily i
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 22:41:47 +0200
Michael Krelin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It depends upon the degree to which one specifies 'sendmail
> > compatibility'. Does it mean "shares some of the same commandline
> > options" or "shares exactly the same configuration file format and
> > all bugs and
> It depends upon the degree to which one specifies 'sendmail
> compatibility'. Does it mean "shares some of the same commandline
> options" or "shares exactly the same configuration file format and all
> bugs and produces identical output"?
I think Mike mentioned compatiblebinaries. Not sure if h
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:30:31 -0500
Larry Lines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems as on topic to say it here as anywhere else. I like Portage.
> I like it better than the Synaptic Package manager, yum, apt-get and
> especially rpm. I feel like it delivers more functionality than all
> of the p
On Tuesday 20 March 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- kirjoitti:
> > # Michael Sterrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (19 Mar 2007)
> > # masked for removal in April.
> > # Old and nasty. Not supported by upstream.
> > # use the newer versions of clanlib instead.
> > =dev-games/clanl
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 19:35 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:04:15 -0400
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 27 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > Do you acknowledge that Portage is a severe limiting factor when it
> > > comes to improving the Gent
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 21:13:18 +0100
Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:50:59 +0100
> Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A few years ago Gentoo had some serious advantages over the
> > competition. These days, Gentoo is at serious risk of being Red
> > Queened
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:50:59 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A few years ago Gentoo had some serious advantages over the
> competition. These days, Gentoo is at serious risk of being Red
> Queened by Ubuntu and Fedora. Providing the same thing that was
> provided two years ago is
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 20:42 +0200, Matthias Langer wrote:
>
> i don't think that personal issues should be taken into account when it
> comes to choosing a new official package manager for gentoo.
It's relevant in that people have to work with the developers of the
package manager. Unlike most
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 13:50:39 -0500
Homer Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wouldn't this be the same as all MTAs providing sendmail
> compatibility? Whereas existing tools still Just Work?
It depends upon the degree to which one specifies 'sendmail
compatibility'. Does it mean "shares some
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 19:35 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> > a good topic for the next council meeting i think would be to start
> > up a spec of requirements that a package manager must satisfy before
> > it'd be an official package manager for Gentoo ... off the top of my
> > head:
> > - the
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 14:04 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Do you acknowledge that Portage is a severe limiting factor when it
> > comes to improving the Gentoo user experience as a whole?
>
> what a lame question ... rather than waste time on t
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:04:15 -0400
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Do you acknowledge that Portage is a severe limiting factor when it
> > comes to improving the Gentoo user experience as a whole?
>
> what a lame question ... rather
On Tuesday 27 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Do you acknowledge that Portage is a severe limiting factor when it
> comes to improving the Gentoo user experience as a whole?
what a lame question ... rather than waste time on this, why dont we get to
some relevant issues ...
to start with, P
Hi all,
Me and my wife and son are moving to Australia. We are now waiting for the
visa's to arrive, and after that will need some time to set ourselves up. Our
computers however are being shipped as we speak and will only arive in
australia after roughly 6 weeks. I'm looking to buy a laptop, b
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 13:55:55 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If Ubuntu or Fedora do the job better then Gentoo has failed in its
> goal of providing a near-ideal tool...
Semantically speaking, it hasn't failed - there's nothing about providing a
better (or "nearer-ideal") tool
# Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (30 Mar 2007)
# Use the from source version dev-java/saxon instead
# Removal in 30 days.
dev-java/saxon-bin
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:07:33 -0700
Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 10:04:57PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 22:47:46 +0200
> > Thomas Rösner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Other things I want from Gentoo right now depend on factors other
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 20:14:58 -0700 (PDT)
"Alec Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Better than many other package managers isn't exactly a glowing
> > commendation. When you consider the disadvantages associated with a
> > source-based distribution, Gentoo has to do a lot better than that
> > in
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 09:49:38 +0200
Thomas Rösner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A package manager that supports a better binary package format
> > (split out local metadata would be a good start) combined with a
> > third party binary provider could deliver that with no tree changes.
>
> But then
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 10:04:57PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 22:47:46 +0200
> Thomas Rösner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Other things I want from Gentoo right now depend on factors other
> > than the package manager, too; prebuilt packages
>
> A package manager that sup
48 matches
Mail list logo
