On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 15:22:19 -0700 > Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> So where exactly is this "sky is falling" issue you're worried >> about? Bugs happen. > > It means anyone using EAPI 2 now is going to encounter severe > breakages with Pkgcore. Simply put, all your Pkgcore users are going to > get screwed over very messily as soon as they try to use any EAPI 2 > things. Is this not something we should be caring about?
I think everyone appreciates the forewarning (even if not everyone appreciates the manner in which it was delivered). I think we do care and we are fixing it. I believe the developers of said packages have a different idea of the risks involved than you and I don't expect everyone to agree on specific software development or release processes. > >> Frankly you're overreacting on this- and that is assuming you *are* >> overreacting instead of just going for a bit of a public smear >> via bugs. > > Bah. If you want me to lecture you on how you're being blatantly > irresponsible and incompetent then I will do, although by the way you > rush on the defensive and start trying to cover your ass by throwing > accusations at me it looks like you already know it. But what I care > about is getting the mess fixed in the most painless way possible. > > This is a real issue and developers need to know the implications. > If you want to call people names do it on your own lists. >> Either way, my vote is fix the bugs, leave EAPI2 as is, and in the >> future kindly file bugs properly (preferably w/out the noise, but >> I'll take usable bug reports in almost any form). > > If you want bug reports via trac instead of IRC, get your trac to > respond faster. > > -- > Ciaran McCreesh >