Gentoo Archives: gentoo-council

From: Thomas Anderson <gentoofan23@g.o>
To: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-council@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:00:08
Message-Id: 20090310140003.GA29607@dodo.hsd1.nj.comcast.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-council] Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal by Luca Barbato
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 03:26:39AM +0100, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Thomas Anderson wrote: >> Hi, >> Attached is my comparison of the two proposals for live sources. >> Sorry about getting it out late, I had to get ahold of a number of >> people to finish writing it up. > > I'd be happier if you actually provided it with a better description and/or > updated drafts along.
As per the Council summary we were suppose to write up a comparison of the advantages/disadvantages of both. It was not in the summary that I had to update the Glep as well as write a comparison.
> > The glep54 doesn't state anything about how/where the specific revision is > stored nor what the live property is and it implicitly provides/triggers in > the package manager.
For one, the live property is rendered useless with glep54. Secondly, the glep does state that those are outside the scope of this particular glep, but can later be implemented once this goes through. Doug and I had a conversation about this yesterday, and glep54 is the first incremental step.
> The main technical objection could be stated as "does nothing beside giving > a token to describe infinity for a version component as version suffix".
That's not a technical objection in my opinion. That's an objection that the doc doesn't go far enough, to which the answer is that it's the first step. Just because the first step doesn't go as far as some would like isn't a reason to take the first step.
> > Similar to the above problem is what occurs when a user understandably > > puts =media-tv/mythtv-0.20_20090301 in package.{use,keywords} and the > > date changes. Also, what happens if the user > > =media-tv/mythtv-0.20.live in package.{use,keywords}? Is live expanded > > that early so it is invalid or is it still valid? > > Having =cat/pkg-ver.live in package.{use, keywords} would translate to a > sort of =cat/pkg-ver* but would be nicer putting directly an isodate to > restrict better what you want in and what you want out.
Hm, so according the the wildcard way: Keywording media-tv/mythtv-live in package.keywords keywords every single version of mythtv!? I'm guessing that's not a very intuitive method. Also, that applies to package.use too. -- --------- Thomas Anderson Gentoo Developer ///////// Areas of responsibility: AMD64, Secretary to the Gentoo Council ---------

Replies