Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: 2009.0 profiles

2009-09-11 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Saturday 29 August 2009 05:42:45 Duncan wrote: Mike Frysinger posted on Sat, 29 Aug 2009 02:56:33 -0400 as excerpted: On Friday 28 August 2009 20:05:12 Alex Alexander wrote: On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 00:23, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Friday 28 August 2009 16:27:18 Sebastian Pipping wrote:

[gentoo-dev] DistroWatch and Gentoo packages: status quo and future

2009-09-11 Thread Sebastian Pipping
Hello there! Among other information the Gentoo page at DistroWatch [1] displays a table on about 200 selected packages [2] and how up to date Gentoo is per package. I assume that DistroWatch is still one of the first places people go to get a feeling for a Distro they heard about, besides

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: 2009.0 profiles

2009-09-11 Thread George Prowse
Mike Frysinger wrote: ... Why not tie the the thing that makes Gentoo unique and one of the major reasons why users use it to the version numbers - Portage. We had 1.2, then 1.4 then 2004.0 and if i'm not mistaken portage is at 2.1 currently. Tie it in and we have 2.2 (currently masked)

[gentoo-dev] Re: DistroWatch and Gentoo packages: status quo and future

2009-09-11 Thread Ryan Hill
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 01:02:44 +0200 Sebastian Pipping webmas...@hartwork.org wrote: Among other information the Gentoo page at DistroWatch [1] displays a table on about 200 selected packages [2] and how up to date Gentoo is per package. I assume that DistroWatch is still one of the first

Re: [gentoo-dev] DistroWatch and Gentoo packages: status quo and future

2009-09-11 Thread Aaron Bauman
Sebastian, I definitely admire your point and know that through your tracking and Google SoC project you have good visibility on this I do however have to disagree. As much as I enjoy the open source community and admire the products they put out I do believe Gentoo has the right