| 1 |
On Monday, June 27, 2011 12:00:19 Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 17:53, Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > I like the ruby approach for the reason that it doesn't require users to |
| 4 |
> > run update scripts like python-updater. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Sure, but if that means the developers now have to bump every package |
| 7 |
> in the tree when a new version of Python comes out, I'm not sure |
| 8 |
> that's the best trade-off. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
if that's the requirement, i'd lean towards the python route we have today. |
| 11 |
especially because python-updater will hit all necessary packages where-as |
| 12 |
ruby will often not as that requires you to do `emerge -u <all installed |
| 13 |
packages>`. |
| 14 |
-mike |
Archives