1 |
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 20:56:35 +0900 |
2 |
Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:31, Marius Mauch wrote: |
5 |
> > Right now 'emerge action' and 'emerge --action' are both supported. |
6 |
> > But as we learned with the rsync case 'emerge action' has potential |
7 |
> > namespace conflicts with 'emerge package' I'd propose to deprecate |
8 |
> > 'emerge action' before we hit another real conflict. |
9 |
> > (The alternative would be to deprecate 'emerge package' in favor of |
10 |
> > a to-be-written 'emerge install <package>', but that's even more |
11 |
> > problematic) |
12 |
> > Technically it's a no-brainer, only potential problem would be user |
13 |
> > confusion. |
14 |
> > Any objections against this for pre5? |
15 |
> |
16 |
> If by "deprecate" you mean to detect when '--' hasn't been prepended |
17 |
> and either go ahead with the action or notify that the package |
18 |
> doesn't exist then I have no objections. Might be better to go with |
19 |
> the latter so that users adjust quickly. |
20 |
|
21 |
You saw the attached one-line patch? |
22 |
Atm it just throws a warning when an action without -- is used. |
23 |
I'm divided on ignoring the action then, on one hand it would be nice to |
24 |
get rid of this, OTOH it would be kinda rude to not have a transition |
25 |
period for people. Anyone else having an opinion on this? |
26 |
|
27 |
Marius |
28 |
|
29 |
-- |
30 |
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub |
31 |
|
32 |
In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be |
33 |
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. |