| 1 |
On 13:39 Sat 23 Aug , Zac Medico wrote: |
| 2 |
> Please consider a PROPERTIES=live value that, when set in an ebuild, |
| 3 |
> will serve to indicate that the ebuild will use some form of "live" |
| 4 |
> source code that may vary each time that the package is installed. |
| 5 |
> The intention is for PROPERTIES=live to have a relatively pure and |
| 6 |
> simple meaning. Therefore, the definition is intentionally more |
| 7 |
> narrow than the definitions previously suggested for the related |
| 8 |
> RESTRICT=live [1] and PROPERTIES=live-sources [2] values. In the |
| 9 |
> future we may add additional (orthogonal) properties to represent |
| 10 |
> other things like locking [3]. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Here's what I'd like to see from this whole PROPERTIES discussion. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
- Are the PROPERTIES more fine-grained than they need to be? |
| 15 |
- Are the common use cases specifiable by a single PROPERTIES setting |
| 16 |
that may actually do multiple things on the back end? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
If there's actually reasons for these things to be very narrow, I'd like |
| 19 |
to see easily usable meta-properties that let people easily say |
| 20 |
something like "I've got a live CVS ebuild" without specifying 20 |
| 21 |
different PROPERTIES. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Thanks, |
| 25 |
Donnie |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Donnie Berkholz |
| 28 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux |
| 29 |
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com |
Archives