Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o>
Subject: Re: Do I really need the tree?
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 21:14:16 +0200
On Friday 02 April 2004 20:43, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Anyway, for now it is much simpler to have a tree of ebuilds which are
> easily maintainable than a single (or a few) large xml files which would
> become a maintenance nightmare for all the developers involved.
> Currently there are many developers who work on only one ebuild in a
> particular area.  As a good example, I maintain exactly one ebuild in
> app-emulation.  What kind of separation would there be for the xml
> files?  How would different versions be accommodated?  Unless there was
> some "magic" which translated the text ebuilds/eclasses/profiles into
> xml (or a db, or whatever) before it went out to the world, and which
> *didn't screw up* in the process, I don't think we'd see much of a
> change any time soon.  Not to mention the amount of work that would need
> to be done to portage itself to modify it to parse xml.  I know that
> this sort of thing has been discussed before, and if memory serves me
> correctly, the reason for not doing so was not so much it being a bad
> idea or anything but really a matter of developer resources and
> energies.  There's really nothing wrong with the current approach that
> would be helped by having the portage tree be in xml or a database, at
> least, not anything worth spending the tremendous amount of resources on
> that it would take.  Personally, I would rather spend my time fixing
> bugs and adding new features to portage, not redoing all of the work I
> have done up until now to make it xml compliant.

I agree. The only feasible option that could have some benefit (which doesn't 
mean I support it) is to make ebuild files selfcontained. There would be some 
benefits in that, but there is a lot that is more important than even 
considering that option.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@g.o
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net
Attachment:
pgpKOapEdWtpF.pgp (signature)
References:
Do I really need the tree?
-- Manuzhai
Re: Do I really need the tree?
-- Paul de Vrieze
Re: Do I really need the tree?
-- Chris Gianelloni
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Do I really need the tree?
Next by thread:
Re: Do I really need the tree?
Previous by date:
Re: xchat's use of local USE flag xchatnogtk
Next by date:
Re: Packages that need selinux policy dependancy


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.