FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-31-2012, 10:18 PM
"Mike Edenfield"
 
Default Happy 10th birthday (in advance)

From: Jason Weisberger [mailto:jbdubbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 2:11 PM

> It would figure that some in the Linux community would
> consider a sub 1.0 release as the birthday of a project .

You were sub-1.0 when you were born, why not Gentoo?

Besides, the 1999 "birthday" reflects the registration of the gentoo.org
domain and thus when the project was officially named Gentoo; otherwise it
would have been 10 years old in 2010, not 2009.
 
Old 04-01-2012, 04:04 PM
Steven J Long
 
Default Happy 10th birthday (in advance)

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> No, what I actually say is *why* things don't work, and if it hasn't
> already been explained, I say how to fix it.
Oh? Where on Earth did you do that in this thread? All you've said so far is
that preserve-libs is "an awful hack that doesn't really work, is
conceptually unsound and that breaks all kinds of things in subtle ways." No
reasoning given whatsoever. Nor any indication of how to fix anything.

I wouldn't mind your snobbish attitude so much, if you did actually present
full and cogent reasoning, the *first* time you "present" an issue. But you
never do, you simply state cryptically that things are broken, and if anyone
queries you, you usually state that the reason others don't see it, is
because they are stupid. (That's what your arguments boil down to.)

> But the first step towards
> getting something fixed is admitting that there's a problem, and you've
> always been awfully reluctant to do that until the damage has already
> been done.
>
Yes, it is hard to admit one has problems; how are things going with your
human interaction problems? (They don't seem to be going that well, given
your continued attitude.) I mean, you have admitted to yourself that you do
have issues in that area, haven't you? After the last 8 or 9 years of being
told you do, including by people who call you a friend, you *must* have
taken that on-board as a problem _you_ need to address by now, surely?
Especially after all the damage that's been caused.

--
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)
 
Old 04-01-2012, 04:54 PM
Jeroen Roovers
 
Default Happy 10th birthday (in advance)

On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 17:04:11 +0100
Steven J Long <slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:

> Yes, it is hard to admit one has problems; how are things going with
> your human interaction problems? (They don't seem to be going that
> well, given your continued attitude.) I mean, you have admitted to
> yourself that you do have issues in that area, haven't you? After the
> last 8 or 9 years of being told you do, including by people who call
> you a friend, you *must* have taken that on-board as a problem _you_
> need to address by now, surely? Especially after all the damage
> that's been caused.

Arguing along those lines, I guess April 7 2006 would be an excellent
date to remember in celebration, so we ought to get cracking on the
cakes and decorations.


jer


[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114944#c235
 
Old 04-01-2012, 04:56 PM
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Default Happy 10th birthday (in advance)

On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 17:04:11 +0100
Steven J Long <slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > No, what I actually say is *why* things don't work, and if it hasn't
> > already been explained, I say how to fix it.
> Oh? Where on Earth did you do that in this thread? All you've said so
> far is that preserve-libs is "an awful hack that doesn't really work,
> is conceptually unsound and that breaks all kinds of things in subtle
> ways." No reasoning given whatsoever. Nor any indication of how to
> fix anything.

preserve-libs has been discussed to death previously and elsewhere. The
changes needed to implement it correctly were included in the original
EAPI 3, but were dropped due to lack of Portage implementation. There's
no need to repeat the whole discussion here.

--
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Old 04-01-2012, 05:00 PM
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Default Happy 10th birthday (in advance)

On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 19:25:58 +0200
Jeroen Roovers <jer@gentoo.org> wrote:
> No, that's what you see from the inside. We, outside your head, the
> others, see it precisely as Brian worded it. Some people apparently
> tolerate or even appreciate your general (online) attitude towards
> humans, but most do not.

You're trying awfully hard to turn this from a discussion about a
feature into a discussion about people. Please don't try to confuse the
two -- attacking the messenger just prolongs getting a fix implemented.

--
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Old 05-04-2012, 05:08 PM
Steven J Long
 
Default Happy 10th birthday (in advance)

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 17:04:11 +0100
> Steven J Long <slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> > No, what I actually say is *why* things don't work, and if it hasn't
>> > already been explained, I say how to fix it.
>> Oh? Where on Earth did you do that in this thread? All you've said so
>> far is that preserve-libs is "an awful hack that doesn't really work,
>> is conceptually unsound and that breaks all kinds of things in subtle
>> ways." No reasoning given whatsoever. Nor any indication of how to
>> fix anything.
>
> preserve-libs has been discussed to death previously and elsewhere. The
> changes needed to implement it correctly were included in the original
> EAPI 3, but were dropped due to lack of Portage implementation.

The usual protocol when you're making assertions like that, if it's already
been discussed, is to provide a url or two to prior discussion. Or at least
state which feature(set) it is you think which does that.

After lots of reading, and recent discussion, you appear to believe that
SLOT operators are the "conceptually sound" method of choice that doesn't
"break things in subtle ways". Is that correct?

> There's no need to repeat the whole discussion here.

No, just provide evidence and reasoning for any assertions you make,
especially when you are criticising someone else's work. You don't have to
repeat yourself: just link to the issues, if you can't summarise them
yourself.

--
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:47 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org