Am Samstag, den 22.08.2009, 02:23 -0400 schrieb Andrew D Kirch: > Tiziano Müller wrote: > > As you can see currently, most time is needed to implemente the features > > in portage. It therefore doesn't make sense to make the EAPI process > > even faster. On the other hand, I think it would make sense to have a > > separate group developing new EAPIs instead of the council. > > > > Cheers, > > Tiziano > > I agree with what's being said here. The previous council ran into a > huge road block with EAPI and GLEP's. I think that EAPI's should be > moved to the Portage herd, Portage just happens to be one of the package managers to implement the specs afterwards. Since you agree with me about implementation taking too long a pretty easy conclusion is that the portage team is already understaffed so moving even more responsibility/work there makes the whole process even slower. (Besides the fact of not including other package manager devs in the process, but guessing from your earlier comments you don't care about that.)
> and GLEPs assigned as necessary until final > approval or dissent is given by the council. And you moaned about bureaucracy earlier today? Interesting. -- Tiziano Müller Gentoo Linux Developer Areas of responsibility: Samba, PostgreSQL, CPP, Python, sysadmin, GLEP Editor E-Mail : dev-z...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : F327 283A E769 2E36 18D5 4DE2 1B05 6A63 AE9C 1E30
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
