| 1 |
On Wednesday 14 December 2005 07:12, Grant Goodyear wrote: |
| 2 |
> Jason Stubbs wrote: [Mon Dec 12 2005, 07:51:51PM CST] |
| 3 |
> > > | As I said already, there will immediately be a bug asking for overlay |
| 4 |
> > > | support. Portage already supports multiple in a form whether anybody |
| 5 |
> > > | likes it or not. How they are supported and how they will change |
| 6 |
> > > | should be of no concern to the glep. What should be of concern is |
| 7 |
> > > | establishing a robust API between the readers and portage such that |
| 8 |
> > > | future changes won't cause breakage. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Wouldn't it suffice for the GLEP to simply have a statement that it will |
| 11 |
> query portage for a list of repositories, once there's a way to do that, |
| 12 |
> but until then the default repo will be assumed? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Modifications are required to portage anyway. Why postpone it until after |
| 15 |
several readers are written and force all of them become broken? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives