On (17/12/07 11:29) Ralf Stephan wrote: > > What does everyone else think about this. Is portage a major blocker > > of progress or not so much? > > As said above, details are major blockers of progress. > > On the other hand, when I switched to paludis, 100 MB > of unnecessary packages suddenly were available to delete. > So, paludis must do something right where portage didn't. > > > ralf > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > Hi, IMHO paludis has (could affort to have) a clear goal right from the start. It's devs has a long experience with pros&cons of portage/ebuilds. They (mainly) wrote PMS (portage package specification) on which to standartize some not so well established practicies (was devmanual). Beside that portage has been maintained by at least 4-5 very skilled people, butthis resulted in some messy/hackish code (quite unevitable i believe). Paludis was build (by it's authors) on portage experience, using a stable base and clear goals (all quite realistic to implement in relatively short time). But having a choice for a package manager is a *very good* thing to have. Just my point of view. Rumen
pgpWpg616kODy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
