On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 09:43:41 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@...> wrote:

> On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 10:41:24 +0200
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
> > A 'type' field would be useful as well, to support various kinds of
> > package sets (much like portage handles currently).
> 
> I'm highly doubtful that there's any real need for different kinds of
> repository-provided sets. We especially don't want sets to be code...

Simple things like getting a list of packages which own a particular
file (for rebuilds) or grepping a variable are useful to users.
For example, the x11 overlay provides a set to rebuild the xorg server
modules after an update.

> > We'd either want to add || ( ) here, or somehow explicitly specify
> > that this is a one-of set.
> 
> No, that's something that's determined by how the set's used, not by
> what's in the set. There's no such thing as a "one-of" set; a set is
> just a list of package dep specs.

Hm, true. I guess noone will want to merge 'a random package matching
a tag' :P.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny