On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 03/07/2018 12:52 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
> >
> > I'm really not happy with the tone of this email, so I'm going to
> > comment on it a bit.
> >
> Ok, it would have benefited from a do-I-sound-like-a-dick proofread. I
> don't want to sound discouraging because this is an area with lots of
> room for improvement. A better conclusion:
> Ultimately, people want to integrate the various PMs with portage
> because portage is pretty good at keeping your system reliable,
> up-to-date, and secure. The language-specific PMs on the other hand only
> care about ease of use and how fast they can get bleeding-edge releases
> to you. Having both would be ideal, but if we simply shell out to the
> language-specific PM, then that would sidestep the good parts of portage
> making the integration pointless. The time and attention involved in
> ebuild packaging turn out to be critical parts of the product.
I really appreciate this reply. I also think that portage provides a lot of
value (particularly for complex projects that are perhaps not
so well suited for use with the less featureful tooling.)


Reply via email to