Re: [gentoo-dev] perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass

2010-04-17 Thread James Cloos
> "CM" == Ciaran McCreesh writes: CM> Users aren't responsible... Even if that is or were so, it is irrelevant. It is ther user's box, and therefore the users' preference is the only valid choice. -JimC -- James Cloos OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6

[gentoo-dev] Re: perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass

2010-04-17 Thread Torsten Veller
* James Cloos : > > "TV" == Torsten Veller writes: > TV> There was a reason why the man-pages were removed: I think it was > TV> collisions protection and perl people use `perldoc` anyway. > > Perl people -- I'm one -- use man(1); given the differences in > usefulness, I cannot imagine why an

Re: [gentoo-dev] perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass

2010-04-17 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:30:46 -0500 Steev Klimaszewski wrote: > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Ciaran McCreesh > wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:23:48 -0400 > > James Cloos wrote: > >> OK.  Let me rephrase.  Portage does not need to validate local > >> changes. > > > > Sure it does. If it doe