On 06/06/2012 10:16 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 11:48:26 +0200
> Pacho Ramos <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> That looks nice, only two notes:
>> - Looks like would be more sense on distinguish between "SLOT" and
>> ABI_SLOT, for example:
>> * dbus-glib would rdepend on glib:2
>> * if glib:2 abi changes, we would pull a ABI_SLOT="2.32"
>> inside glib-2 ebuild
>> * dbus-glib rdepending on glib:=2 would get rebuilt
>> If we would use "SLOT" for all the cases, how would we handle it? I
>> mean, glib slot would be bumped to "2.32" and dbus-glib ebuilds
>> updated to rdepend on every new slot? Or would package managers
>> distinct between "versions" inside the same SLOT variable?
> You'd have a slot per ABI, and be encouraged to allow multiple versions
> of glib to be installed in parallel. If you really couldn't do that
> (and you should think very carefully before saying you can't, since
> this directly affects users in a huge way), you can make the slots
> block each other.
It seems like you're trying to make glib fit your SLOT operator model,
even though it's a natural fit for the ABI_SLOT operator model.