El dom, 29-04-2007 a las 23:33 +0200, Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen
escribió:
> Hi everybody,
> 
> Finally I'm home from vacation:-)

Great :)
Canarias was nice?

> On Tuesday 24 April 2007 09:43, josé Alberto Suárez López wrote:
> > What about 2 trees? core and extras.
> >
> > - Core will be maintained by a reduced group of dev and must be quite
> > stable. between releases only will have security updates/bug fixing.
> > This tree must be the minimal necessary to build gnap + some basic
> > tools/servers/packages
> >
> > - Extras will more open and will have more ebuilds, so ever must depend
> > on ebuild on core.
> This is more or less how I already maintain my private GNAP sources.
> 
> I have a GNAP base with a minimal Portage snapshot and overlays+specs for 
> various other alternatives (Asterisk/Load balancer/MythTV). Unfortunately 
> this leaves a lot of duplicates in the spec files. An inheritance/tree based 
> approach like profiles would probably cut down on a lot of duplicates. I 
> could perhaps just use different profiles and leave the GNAP files more or 
> less empty, but a 100% GNAP approach might be better.
> 
> I also have Thierry's scripts to make minimal snapshots (with a few fixes of 
> my own).

So want you to do this :)

> Besides overlays we also need some place to hold stage/portage tarballs.

We also need a place to mirror all files required by gnap-overlay. SO
i'm waiting a reply from gentoo-infra :)


--
gnap-dev@g.o mailing list