On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 00:19:40 +0200 hasufell <[email protected]> wrote: > On 08/14/2013 10:56 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: > > If you want PMS to go away, and call portage the one-and-true PM for > > Gentoo, then it's probably something for the Council to decide. > > > > I think that would make sense. We don't have enough resources for such > fun and overcoming PMS burdens has been a major concern for everyone > who is looking to improve basic functionality.
What PMS burdens? Give one example of a feature that the Council has approved that was abandoned because of PMS. > In the end, people rather go for eclass solutions or just give up. > That has brought us to the current discussion, to base.eclass base.eclass was a legacy from the old pre-natively-supported implementation of eclasses. Unfortunately for reasons entirely unrelated to PMS, a few developers haven't bothered moving away from it. > and to the multilib eclasses with a very painful way of migration. > Mind that I am an author of one of those eclasses as well, so I'm not > generally objecting. But it's a fact that portage multilib was held > back basically by useless PMS politics, so that we can support > alternative PMs like paludis. No, it was held back because no-one was able to explain what was changed, and because there was no agreement between developers that whatever it was that was changed was the right way to do it. The Council hasn't approved the use of Portage multilib. > And that's not the only thing that is annoying about PMS and the > politics behind it. > > Gentoo has become very slow in terms of decision making and progress. > GLEPs to improve security are "not implemented" for _years_ and people > have no idea whether we need a PMS section for that or not. It wasn't > really discussed and not one bothers anymore. Again, nothing to do with PMS. Getting a feature that has Council approval into PMS typically takes a day or two. The delays on the security GLEPs are down to Portage and to git migration, not PMS. PMS has *helped* with progress, not slowed it down: it has allowed us to experiment with new features in other, quicker-to-develop package managers before having to spend the effort implementing them in Portage. Have a look at features added in EAPIs 1 and later: at a guess half of them were the direct result of testing in other package managers. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
