Re: [gentoo-dev] proposed shift of files in the tree of non profiles files into seperate dir

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Sat, 2005-08-27 at 03:42 -0500, Brian Harring wrote:
> Further, while no one has yet proposed anything concrete, people have
> been after revamping the profile implementation.  Quite likely if/when
> this occurs, it's going to require a seperate directory to avoid any
> issues with older portage installations accessing it.
> Shifting the files now while changes are being made addresses that
> concern, and makes things a bit more logical.

This could still be done under profiles.  Personally, I like the idea of
something more like this:

project/os/arch/version for profiles

This would give us something like this:

default/linux/x86/2006.0
default/freebsd/alpha/2006.0
hardened/linux/amd64/2006.0/2.4
hardened/freebsd/x86/2006.0
uclibc/linux/mips/2006.0/cobalt
server/linux/x86/2006.0

etc.

> Two scenarios for how this will result in visible issues for people-
> 1) CVS users, aka, devs.  Devs *should* be running latest portage,
>    which would know about the shift.  If they're running an older
>    portage version and aren't willing to upgrade, they tag the
>    symlinks themselves.  It's a minor annoyance frankly; assuming they
>    read -dev (like they're suppossed to :P ), they'll know in advance
>    it's coming.

Many devs use the latest stable versions of packages rather than testing
versions.  I tend to find this to be a good thing as there are often
bugs in particular combinations of package versions that aren't
necessarily spotted when running all ~arch.

Also, devs are not required to read or even be subscribed to -dev.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux