On Wed, 2019-10-23 at 17:04 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: > On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 01:18:02AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote: > > On 10/21/2019 19:36, Matt Turner wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 9:42 AM Richard Yao <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Also, another idea is to use a cheap hash function (e.g. fletcher) and > > > > just have the mirrors do the hashing behind the scenes. Then we would > > > > have the best of both worlds. > > > > > > It probably would have been better to make these suggestions when the > > > GLEP was discussed close to two years ago. > > > > > > I'm glad that we have ideas for improvements but I worry that we're > > > just backseat driving at this point given that the GLEP's now > > > implemented. > > > > Agreed, although, I don't even remember this coming up two years ago. But, > > I was tied up with a lot of work-related stress and tasks, so probably just > > my memory storage backend not having enough cycles to commit it > > to...neurons. > > After looking at this further, I found that the glep was presented to > us in Jan 2018 on the dev ml [1]. > > I checked all council meeting logs and discovered that this was never > brought to us formally for approval. > > It looks like the developers decided to do this as an > infrastructure/portage project and because of that they felt like they > didn't need a glep. >
...or simply forgotten whether it was approved or not after waiting almost two years for Portage team provide a reference implementation. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
