Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: [Wed May 17 2006, 04:57:59PM CDT] > Hear, hear. It should be clear to everybody by now that the thread in > question is not going to lead to a solution.
Actually, I tend to disagree with that sentiment. Sure, it's quite a long thread, but it's also covered a great deal: (a) what are the advantages and disadvantages of such a profile, (b) what such a profile would look like, (c) should an alternative package manager influence the tree before it becomes stable, (d) would bug reports for such an unstable package manager be unduly burdensome, (e) what are the invariants for an alternative package manager, (f) what would be required for an alternative package manager to become a replacement package manager, (g) is it reasonable to have an alternative, potentially replacement, package manager that is not Gentoo-owned, and I'm sure there are others. More importantly, there seem to have been reasonable answers to many of those questions. Also, it seems to me that this thread was moving towards a consensus that most people would like to see paludis mature a bit more before a profile is added, but that if there were clear evidence that paludis wasn't doing any of those things described on the paludis website then many people would, indeed, support a paludis profile in the future. (As an aside, I don't happen to agree with that presumed consensus, as I always thought that keeping the *BSD stuff in an overlay made the barrier to entry too high, and I'd hate to see that mistake repeated.) In any event, there's a common knee-jerk reaction that any lengthy thread is, by definition, a "flamewar". Despite the occasionally heated rhetoric, I've seen a lot of valuable content in that thread, and that sort of discussion is certainly not something that I would want to discourage! -g2boojum- -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76
pgpNAVhQZhJFm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
