Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Fernando J. Pereda" <ferdy@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Do not modify ebuilds which are already in the tree... even if masked
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:21:35
Message-Id: 20070612101631.GC4738@ferdyx.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Do not modify ebuilds which are already in the tree... even if masked by cilly
1 On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 12:07:11PM +0200, cilly wrote:
2 > Hi all,
3 >
4 > I think it is worth to discuss about `Do not modify ebuilds which are
5 > already in the tree... even if masked.`
6 >
7 > Sometimes ebuilds which are already in the portage tree are modified
8 > without changing the version-number, i.e. ebuild-r1 is in the portage
9 > tree and the ebuild-r1 gets changed, i.e. useflag or other issues
10 > without changing the version number to ebuild-r2. This causes
11 > confusion i.e. in bug-reports.
12 >
13 > My opinion is not to change any ebuild which is in the portage tree,
14 > even if the ebuild is masked. I think the better way is to add an
15 > ebuild with an updated version number, even if the ebuild is still
16 > masked.
17 >
18 > I also recommend to manage hard-masked packages the same way, it
19 > prevents confusion in bug-reports.
20 >
21 > What do you think?
22
23 I think this is also a bad idea. I seem to recall that this is
24 documented somewhere in the Developer Handbook...
25
26 - ferdy
27
28 --
29 Fernando J. Pereda Garcimartín
30 20BB BDC3 761A 4781 E6ED ED0B 0A48 5B0C 60BD 28D4