Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: TomWij@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] git.eclass, git-2.eclass... git-r1.eclass?
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:32:18
Message-Id: 20130828173222.47900620@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] git.eclass, git-2.eclass... git-r1.eclass? by Tom Wijsman
1 Dnia 2013-08-28, o godz. 16:31:36
2 Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o> napisał(a):
3
4 > On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:00:07 +0200
5 > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
6 >
7 > > What are your thoughts?
8 >
9 > If possible, assuming it is not already possible I would like to see
10 > support for checking out multiple repositories; that way the patches
11 > can simply be obtained from a repository instead of having to
12 > explicitly snapshot them for
13 >
14 > Also, please just call it git-3.eclass as it is a major change; any
15 > other form of naming will introduce confusion (eg. -r1 < -2), also we
16 > probably shouldn't change git-2.eclass as even when masked it doesn't
17 > seem like a good thing to break its current API and documentation as
18 > well as what actually works in the Portage tree.
19
20 More I think about it, I feel like API isn't going to change that much.
21 Rather the effects for end users are going to change.
22
23 For example, if EGIT_PROJECT stops working that wouldn't cause any real
24 difference to the ebuild. Worst case, there will be a single re-fetch
25 for users.
26
27 > Regardless, thanks for getting rid of git.eclass and improving it.
28
29 Just to make it clear, AFAIR scarabeus did most of the work for git-2.
30 I've just took it over so it didn't end up unmaintained but, as you can
31 see, I'd feel better rewriting it since some of the things done inside
32 are just black magic.
33
34 --
35 Best regards,
36 Michał Górny

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature