On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 06:55:45 -0400 Richard Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 08:02:48 +0200 > > Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> Had you bothered to write even trivial test suites for EAPI 1, > >>> you'd've found at least one major bug straight away. > >> http://www.pkgcore.org/trac/pkgcore/newticket > > > > http://www.pkgcore.org/trac/pkgcore/ticket/197 > > Uh - what is the goal on this list - to make Gentoo a better > distribution or to point out that the package manager that I maintain > is better than the package manager that you maintain?
The point is to make pkgcore a better package manager by getting the developers to do some basic testing. We're not talking some obscure, weird bug here. We're talking a really obvious, major screwup that a couple of quick unit tests would catch straight away. > And if you don't want to be part of the solution, then why are you > wasting your time here? I'm a big fan of PMS/paludis/etc in general, > but why waste your time contributing these things to Gentoo if you > don't want Gentoo to succeed? If you do want Gentoo to succeed, then > why not give others a helping hand when it costs you virtually > nothing to do so? Give a man a bug report and he fixes one bug. Persuade a man to write basic unit tests and he fixes a whole load of bugs and catches a whole load more in the future before shipping them out. And then you give him bug reports for what that doesn't catch. The problem is, the pkgcore people are being blatantly irresponsible by sticking a package manager that claims to support EAPI 1 in the tree without actually supporting EAPI 1. In particular, it means we'll have to decide whether to avoid using some EAPI 1 features just to avoid breaking people using older pkgcore versions. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
