On 08/14/2013 11:44 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 23:41:56 +0800 > Patrick Lauer <patr...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> On 08/14/2013 09:02 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >>>>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Michael Palimaka >>>>> <kensing...@gentoo.org> wrote: Right now, however, >>>>> it might be useful if only to get a sense for how they're being >>>>> used, trade ideas, etc. >> >>> No, we can't. Sets are portage-specific, the tree needs to follow >>> PMS. >> >> So fix PMS to reflect reality. Again. > > I think you're misunderstanding the point of a standard here. > Well, it should reflect reality.
PMS is still broken as much as it does not reflect the state of portage before PMS was written, and we've had to patch it up a few times to make it coherent, plus it is still lacking half the things that would make it useful as a standard. Your academic interpretation of standard as a platonic ideal disconnected from reality serves no purpose.
