Luca Barbato schrieb:
> Bernd Steinhauser wrote:
>>>> With your approach, we would have to fix the version after every 
>>>> 4.1.x release. That sounds awful, tbh. So:
>>>
>>> No that enforce people update the deps or at least gives one more 
>>> reason to do. Keep in mind that -9999, -scm ebuild or .live templates 
>>> aren't for public consumption.
>> Except, that it is not that easy.
>> The point of time where you have to update your kde deps has nothing 
>> to do with that.
>> This is why we recommend to always reinstall everything from kde svn.
>> It is even more likely, that these problems occur after the "bump", 
>> that shouldn't have been one at all.
> 
> emerge -C @kde-svn
> 
> emerge @kde-svn
> 
> that should suffice.
Wow, impressive.

Actually, you can't be serious...

>> Of course I can track 4.1.1 with -scm, too, but that was absolutely 
>> not the point and is by far not what I wanted.
>> The point was to track the 4.1 branch and not tags inside.
> 
> If you want to track something you write a template for such thing, you 
> just need to put a meaningful name, portage won't care if foo-0.live is 
> really bar branch baz from repo dup.
> 
> Advanced testers should be able to pick the live template and help 
> testing and should be able to smoothly update, I'm all for it.
See, the problem here is, that, I have been using -scm as proposed in 
GLEP 54 for quite some time now and it works very well.
I just don't see any benefit from your proposal, on the contrary there 
are issues.
And that includes the ordering.
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list