On Thursday 18 May 2006 00:26, Stephen Bennett wrote: > Given the sheer volume of impassioned response, regardless of any > technical arguments, I'm dropping the top-level profile idea for now. > Several architecture teams have expressed an interest in creating > sub-profiles under their own, however, and I'll be working with them to > get those implemented. Perhaps I'll revisit the top-level idea at a > later date when all the fuss has died down.
I seriously disagree with this action. Such profiles have the same problems as a toplevel profile, and as such are just as problematic as a toplevel paludis profile. Since the profile does not actually add anything except making portage a virtual (which is independent of paludis, and a good idea in any case), there is also no use for doing so. If you really really need to have a profile, it might be discussable to have no-portage profiles, that do not include portage or python in system. These however must still be portage compatible, and independent of a package manager. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net
pgpl1B6vmDN6S.pgp
Description: PGP signature
