Mailing List Archive

Looks like a good job to me.

--
Best Regards,
Piotr Jaroszyński
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Stephen Bennett wrote:
> The first public draft of PMS is open for comment. The PDF is at
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~spb/pms.pdf, and will be updated periodically
> as changes are made. Anonymous SVN access to the LaTeX source is
> available; I won't give the URL here since most won't need it and I'd
> rather not run the risk of overloading the server. Find someone on IRC
> if you need it, which will probably be only if you are producing
> patches or reviewing changes just checked in.

I'll second the others, I started reading it and it's very educational
(at least for me).

I am wondering about the FiXmes though. Are they supposed to be "fixed"
for EAPI=0 or are they references for quirky/weird portage behaviors
that should be addressed for newer versions of the portage spec (and
therefor PMS implementations)

Thanks

Rémi
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:02:06 +0200
Rémi Cardona <remi@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I am wondering about the FiXmes though. Are they supposed to be
> "fixed" for EAPI=0 or are they references for quirky/weird portage
> behaviors that should be addressed for newer versions of the portage
> spec (and therefor PMS implementations)

They're things that need to be agreed upon before the document is
presented to the Council.

--
Ciaran McCreesh

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 02:33:50 +0100
Stephen Bennett <spb@gentoo.org> wrote:
> The first public draft of PMS is open for comment. The PDF is at
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~spb/pms.pdf

Open issues that need to be addressed before submission to the Council
are at [1]. Comments are welcomed, so long as people bear in mind:

* PMS isn't the place to push through changes, and it's not an excuse
for special interest groups to try to sneak in policy. PMS should only
contradict Portage behaviour where Portage is doing something silly.
PMS has to consider how things *are*, rather than how things should be.
If you're looking to get something changed, wait until the EAPI-1
discussions that will no doubt take place at some point.

* PMS doesn't specify coding style issues (this extends to things that
aren't strictly speaking coding style, such as "package names should be
all lowercase where possible"). Things like indenting are relevant to
the devmanual, but have no effect upon a package manager.

* One issue per bug, one bug per issue, and for the sanity of those of
us who have to keep track of issues, try to keep feedback on bugzilla.

For the curious, Paludis non-compliance is being tracked at [2]. So far
as I'm aware, there's no central list for Portage or Pkgcore
non-compliance.

[1] http://tinyurl.com/2z58xn
[2] http://paludis.pioto.org/trac/query?milestone=PMS+Compliance

--
Ciaran McCreesh

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 00:21:01 +0100
Steve Long <slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > For the curious, Paludis non-compliance is being tracked at [2]. So
> > far as I'm aware, there's no central list for Portage or Pkgcore
> > non-compliance.
> >
> Nice doc. I'm guessing that you have a list of Portage's
> non-compliance?

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> So far as I'm aware, there's no central list for Portage or Pkgcore
> non-compliance.

--
Ciaran McCreesh

Piotr Jaroszy?ski wrote:

> Looks like a good job to me.
>
++

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> For the curious, Paludis non-compliance is being tracked at [2]. So far
> as I'm aware, there's no central list for Portage or Pkgcore
> non-compliance.
>
Nice doc. I'm guessing that you have a list of Portage's non-compliance?

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 00:21:01 +0100
> Steve Long <slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> > For the curious, Paludis non-compliance is being tracked at [2]. So
>> > far as I'm aware, there's no central list for Portage or Pkgcore
>> > non-compliance.
>> >
>> Nice doc. I'm guessing that you have a list of Portage's
>> non-compliance?
>
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> So far as I'm aware, there's no central list for Portage or Pkgcore
>> non-compliance.
>
Silly me, i thought you'd have a detailed breakdown of Portage's behaviour
for the PMS, including its problems- just not one you were about to
maintain or track `centrally'.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list