Gentoo Archives: gentoo-qa

From: Stephen Bennett <spb@g.o>
To: gentoo-qa@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-qa] Support of other package managers
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 19:17:38
Message-Id: 448F0F30.3000302@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-qa] Support of other package managers by Mark Loeser
Mark Loeser wrote:
> As I see it, the tree is for Portage, and it is nice if it works with > other package managers (such as pkgcore or paludis),
If anything, I see it the other way. By far our largest and most valuable piece of code is the tree, and Portage exists to provide an environment in which it can be of use. > but I do not
> believe we should be making changes, of any kind, just to improve how > their programs work. I have no problems with rewrites of Portage, but > making changes to the live tree for something other than Portage does > not seem to make sense to me. If we decide to recognize rewrites as > official alternatives, then making changes makes sense, but until that > point, I don't believe it does.
If someone were wanting to change existing parts of the tree for no other reason than compatibility with another package manager, I'd agree with you. I don't, however, see a problem in adding a self-contained piece of code that has no effect on the rest of the tree. -- gentoo-qa@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-qa] Support of other package managers Seemant Kulleen <seemant@g.o>