| 1 |
On Thu, 6 Nov 2008 17:42:14 -0800 |
| 2 |
Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Also, it's possible to fork off an individual package and share it |
| 4 |
> > without uploading the whole repository by creating a patchset from |
| 5 |
> > the branch, which I believe is how several kernel devs work. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Patchsets suck because you can't just grab a repo and emerge what's |
| 8 |
> in it. That's the type of usability we want. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Isn't this something that should be solved by making the package |
| 11 |
manager better at handling lots of repositories? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
For single codebase projects that have to be compiled all together, |
| 14 |
handling external contributions pretty much has to be done at the |
| 15 |
source control level, since any modification has to be done at entire |
| 16 |
codebase scope. But for ebuilds there isn't such a restriction, and |
| 17 |
there's nothing stopping users from having several dozen repositories |
| 18 |
and mixing and matching them as they see fit. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives