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: Kent Fredric <kentfredric@...>
Subject: Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 04:55:01 +1200
On 2 June 2012 04:33, Robin H. Johnson <robbat2@g.o> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 10:45:48AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
>> Overlays are completely separate repositories. There is nothing stopping
>> an overlay from using git right now even if the main tree isn't using
>> git. They just work in their git repositories until they are ready to
>> commit something to the main tree, then they move the changes to the
>> main tree.
> What about overlay repositories that elect to be a branch of the main
> tree via git?
>
> Do we call that forbidden usage?

You can't practically use any overlay foolish enough to publish these
repositories for end user consumption.

Its just a silly idea. There's no problem with having overlays cloned
into a branch as a step towards it hitting mainline, but overlays
being distributed to users as main tree branches is just a silly idea.

 Mostly, because end-users will still have ::gentoo via rsync, and the
load of cloning a git repo of ::gentoo will be too much for the
average user, doing that just to get an overlay is exhaustively
execessive vs the current mechanism we have for overlays, and it comes
at a penalty at being not as good as overlays in that you can't easily
have >1 of them.

-- 
Kent

perl -e  "print substr( \"edrgmaM  SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3,
3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );"

http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz


References:
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Robin H. Johnson
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Dirkjan Ochtman
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Robin H. Johnson
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Rich Freeman
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Robin H. Johnson
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- William Hubbs
Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Duncan
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- William Hubbs
Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Duncan
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- William Hubbs
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Robin H. Johnson
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Next by thread:
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Previous by date:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Next by date:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver


Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

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