On 08/14/2017 03:39 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:20:26 -0700
> Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:26 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Portage supports sets, but the PMS has no mention. Then there is
>>> debate on what they are. Creating s
On 2017-08-16 05:56, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > Considering it says exactly the same for EAPI 5, this is almost
> > certainly a mistake - but I'd rather confirm this here before
> > changing the page.
> Unfortunately, information about EAPI 4 and 5 support is not entirely
> clear from the NEWS file
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2017, Marek Szuba wrote:
> On 2017-08-14 23:46, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
>> pkgcore - does not support EAPI 6, only experimental EAPI 5
> Side note - according to
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Package_Manager_Specification
> pkgcore has supported EAPI 6 since
On 2017-08-14 23:46, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> pkgcore - does not support EAPI 6, only experimental EAPI 5
Side note - according to
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Package_Manager_Specification
pkgcore has supported EAPI 6 since version 0.9.3. Considering it says
exactly the same for
On pon, 2017-08-14 at 18:39 -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:20:26 -0700
> Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:26 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Portage supports sets, but the PMS has no mention. Then there is
> > > debate on what
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:20:26 -0700
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:26 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
> wrote:
> >
> > Portage supports sets, but the PMS has no mention. Then there is
> > debate on what they are. Creating so much noise it drowns the bug
> > request and makes it invali
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 4:46 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 09:55:02 -0500
> Gordon Pettey wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Alexander Berntsen
> > wrote:
> >
> > > While the PMS perhaps hasn't been an unequivocal success, it's
> > > still a good effort with
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:26 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
wrote:
>
> Portage supports sets, but the PMS has no mention. Then there is debate
> on what they are. Creating so much noise it drowns the bug request and
> makes it invalid. Despite the need still existing, and PMS lacking
> anything on se
On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 09:55:02 -0500
Gordon Pettey wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Alexander Berntsen
> wrote:
>
> > While the PMS perhaps hasn't been an unequivocal success, it's
> > still a good effort with some success. I would be disappointed to
> > see the proposed change, and view
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:09:15 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> >
> > I am sure
> > that portage developers gnash their teeth at blockers stemming from
> > PMS, but I wholeheartedly believe that Gentoo, PMS and Portage are
> > all better off for it.
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 4:42 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
wrote:
>
> I cannot explain why those who do portage development are not the PMS
> authors.
>
Have you considered asking them?
--
Rich
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 18:42:21 +
Peter Stuge wrote:
> Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> > While the PMS perhaps hasn't been an unequivocal success, it's
> > still a good effort with some success. I would be disappointed to
> > see the proposed change, and view it as a bad sign for Gentoo.
>
> As f
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
>
> I am sure
> that portage developers gnash their teeth at blockers stemming from
> PMS, but I wholeheartedly believe that Gentoo, PMS and Portage are
> all better off for it.
>
Honestly, I've yet to see any portage developers complaining abou
Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> While the PMS perhaps hasn't been an unequivocal success, it's still a
> good effort with some success. I would be disappointed to see the
> proposed change, and view it as a bad sign for Gentoo.
As far as technical documentation about how ebuilds work (the core of
Gent
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Alexander Berntsen
wrote:
> While the PMS perhaps hasn't been an unequivocal success, it's still a
> good effort with some success. I would be disappointed to see the
> proposed change, and view it as a bad sign for Gentoo.
>
Also, how many Portages are there tha
While the PMS perhaps hasn't been an unequivocal success, it's still a
good effort with some success. I would be disappointed to see the
proposed change, and view it as a bad sign for Gentoo.
--
Alexander
berna...@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
signature.asc
Description: OpenPG
On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 06:05:00PM -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> I think Gentoo council, developers, and portage developers should
> consider changing the PMS, to something like Portage Manager
> Specification, or Gentoo Portage Specification. Make it Gentoo
> and portage specific, and oth
I think Gentoo council, developers, and portage developers should
consider changing the PMS, to something like Portage Manager
Specification, or Gentoo Portage Specification. Make it Gentoo
and portage specific, and others adhere to that standard.
I understand the rationale behind PMS. However the
18 matches
Mail list logo
