On Sat, 16 May 2009 11:28:57 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
Why do we let utterly *useless* discussions eat into our precious
developer time?
Why is it that this thread has 500 replies
Because the way Gentoo works, any objection to a proposal, valid or not,
whether or not
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
Let's not blatantly ignore our REAL problems. We can no longer afford
to maintain the status-quo of pedantic masturbatory discussions on the
finer points of ebuild formats. We cannot AFFORD to look the other way
while the distro rots away.
What exactly is your
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
Because the way Gentoo works, any objection to a proposal, valid or not,
whether or not it's already been addressed, has to be answered before a
proposal gets anywhere. Thus, every time people post nonsense
On Sat, 16 May 2009 15:13:50 -0600
Denis Dupeyron calc...@gentoo.org wrote:
If the author had documented these objections and the answers in the
glep then it would have made it possible to avoid most of what you
call the nonsense.
Except that at the last Council meeting, there were complaints
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
Except that at the last Council meeting, there were complaints that
objections *had* been included and discussed in the GLEP, and claims
that including such material made the GLEP less clear.
As unfortunate
On Sat, 16 May 2009 15:27:59 -0600
Denis Dupeyron calc...@gentoo.org wrote:
This is another of those issues where whichever way it's done, some
people complain.
As long as you go by the rules those who complain about you doing so
are wrong. I've been told you were not the kind who was
Why do we let utterly *useless* discussions eat into our precious
developer time?
Why is it that this thread has 500 replies, but Mart's
maintainer-wanted thread has less than 10?
I *do not care* if the ebuild format will not be properly extensible
when the need arises. We'll cross that bridge
