Apparently, though unproven, at 00:43 on Saturday 23 October 2010, Stroller did opine thusly:
> On 22 Oct 2010, at 21:32, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > ... > > Did you and I read the same mail thread? I read all of it - did you? > > Apparently you have poorer reading comprehension that I do: > >> That Gentoo-dev thread was 3 or 4 months ago, and I haven't read all of > >> it today. I saw that. I thought it odd you would cite the thread in your reasoning right after saying you hadn't read all of it. I wanted you to see the strangeness of that on your own. > I would stand by my advice: > >> ... I would discourage anyone in stable > >> from migrating to Openrc unless they need to, or unless they're deciding > >> to run entirely ~arch packages on their system. From my understanding I > >> would "wait and see", and migrate when the devs decide the time is right > >> for a mass migration of stable users. That's fine. people running stable should stick with stable for the most part. See below. > This is all totally irrelevant: > > That's a straw man argument. Roy left Gentoo because of conflicts between > > his wish to be 100% POSIX compliant ... > > Roy did not leave openrc development becuase it's a lost cause > > and it has nothing to do with what I said. And your response now has nothing to do with what I said. I wasn't commenting on the merits of migrating, I was commenting on you quoting Roy: "> Roy is the author, his own words: > The fact that several people said they would attempt a > stable push and then gave up (I was one - lol) says quite a > bit really. " Now why would you have quoted that? I can see only one reason - the author hints at it being not good enough therefore you should look long and hard before using it. I pointed out, correctly I believe, that that is irrelevant. Roy left Gentoo and openrc because he couldn't have his way re POSIX compliance. That's a straw man - setting up a weak disrelated argument to somehow prove your point later. It's fallacious. > My advice was made in response to Neil's comment: > >>> you may as well do the upgrade when you feel like it rather that when > >>> the devs decide to flip a keyword. > > I've snipped that to an even tighter crop, so that you don't miss what he > said. And you snipped out the very quote from Roy above I was commenting on. I saw that. So I put it back. > > Can I summarise my advice as: > > Don't migrate a single package to ~arch just for the fun of it. > > ?? > > I'm pretty sure you yourself have said in the past to either run stable or > ~arch, but not to mess around with unmasking the odd single or couple of > packages here or there. I agree with you, on this occasion. I never said in this thread that anyone should not do that. I generally do advise people to stick with one or the other by and large. > When "the devs decide to flip a keyword" then the documentation for the > Openrc migration will be at its best. The migration will be fully > supported for stable users, and there will be lots of discussion about it > here. It will be the best time to make the switch. > > Stroller. > > > PS: please don't CC me on messages to the list. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
