1 |
On Saturday 29 April 2006 19:52, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
2 |
> Jan Kundrát wrote: |
3 |
> > Ryan Phillips wrote: |
4 |
> >> Stable and unstable keywords are a hack on top of a version control |
5 |
> >> system. We wouldn't have them if gentoo used an SCM that supports |
6 |
> >> true branches. There would be no need. |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > Umm, I'm not an ebuild dev, but how would users mix stable and |
9 |
> > unstable packages in such a case? |
10 |
> |
11 |
> They would probably have to check out two trees. But the two trees |
12 |
> combined would likely be the same size as the single tree now, since a |
13 |
> lot of packages have at least two ebuilds available, one ~arch and one |
14 |
> stable. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> The real showstopper in my mind is that having a single ~arch and a |
17 |
> single stable tree means you can't selectively stable things on |
18 |
> different architectures at different times. |
19 |
|
20 |
Agreed, the main advantage of a proper vcs would be that the ancestry |
21 |
between different ebuild versions would be visible. This would make it |
22 |
even possible to merge back working changes from a testing version to a |
23 |
stable version without gambling that it will work. |
24 |
|
25 |
Paul |
26 |
|
27 |
-- |
28 |
Paul de Vrieze |
29 |
Gentoo Developer |
30 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
31 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |