Gentoo Archives: gentoo-council

From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>
To: Thomas Anderson <gentoofan23@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 02:26:44
Message-Id: 49B5CFDF.3050006@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-council] Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal by Thomas Anderson
1 Thomas Anderson wrote:
2 > Hi,
3 >
4 > Attached is my comparison of the two proposals for live sources.
5 > Sorry about getting it out late, I had to get ahold of a number of
6 > people to finish writing it up.
7
8 I'd be happier if you actually provided it with a better description
9 and/or updated drafts along.
10
11 The glep54 doesn't state anything about how/where the specific revision
12 is stored nor what the live property is and it implicitly
13 provides/triggers in the package manager.
14
15 The main technical objection could be stated as "does nothing beside
16 giving a token to describe infinity for a version component as version
17 suffix".
18
19 The actual draft for the live templates is present at
20
21 http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero/glep/liveebuild.rst
22
23 And should cover the concern you raised here beside the following
24
25 > Similar to the above problem is what occurs when a user understandably
26 > puts =media-tv/mythtv-0.20_20090301 in package.{use,keywords} and the
27 > date changes. Also, what happens if the user
28 > =media-tv/mythtv-0.20.live in package.{use,keywords}? Is live expanded
29 > that early so it is invalid or is it still valid?
30
31 Having =cat/pkg-ver.live in package.{use, keywords} would translate to a
32 sort of =cat/pkg-ver* but would be nicer putting directly an isodate to
33 restrict better what you want in and what you want out.
34
35 lu
36
37 --
38
39 Luca Barbato
40 Gentoo Council Member
41 Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
42 http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-council] Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal Thomas Anderson <gentoofan23@g.o>