Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Live source based ebuild proposals Was: [gentoo-council] Council log and summary for meeting on 02/12/09
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 20:38:06
Message-Id: 20090213203758.5b04ca93@snowmobile
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Live source based ebuild proposals Was: [gentoo-council] Council log and summary for meeting on 02/12/09 by Luca Barbato
1 On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:29:32 +0100
2 Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote:
3 > > No it doesn't. _pre1, _pre2 etc does not accurately represent how
4 > > upstream do releases.
5 >
6 > upstream is an undefined entity. We knows already upstreams that
7 > follow a specific version numbering, that tag their release before
8 > time and that even have playground branches where interesting&scary
9 > thing happen, upstreams that keep everything on a single branch and
10 > people doing something insane or worse.
11 >
12 > so NOTHING could represent something unpredictable.
14 No, but something can represent the most commonly used models. We can't
15 do -scm packages for upstreams that do utterly crazy stuff anyway, so
16 we'll stick to the reasonably sane ones.
18 > > And GLEP 54 solves the entire thing.
19 > > It lets you have foo-scm tracking master, foo-2.0-scm tracking the
20 > > 2.0 branch and foo-1.0-scm tracking the 1.0 branch, and the
21 > > ordering all works correctly. It's the only solution anyone's come
22 > > up with that gets this right.
23 >
24 > That doesn't cover the "pu" case brought up by ferdy or another case
25 > in which you plan to track a branch that isn't a version branch or
26 > hasn't a version target, if you want to be strict. So scm solve the
27 > same problem _live solves or plain usage of "property live" within
28 > current ebuilds solves.
30 Topic branches can be covered by use flags. 'pu' and 'master' both map
31 onto a single foo-scm package. Version-wise, 'pu' and 'master' are both
32 the same, and their version is greater than any existing release. GLEP
33 54 models this correctly.
35 > In short any proposal that includes the "live property" gives you the
36 > same benefits. The live template proposal gives added value to the
37 > thing since it makes possible do more and something more useful since
38 > the reduced scope of interest tracking upstream has in the end.
40 How do I track an upstream who has a 0.34 branch (which is equal to or
41 ahead of the most recent 0.34.x release), a 0.36 branch (which is equal
42 to or ahead of the most recent 0.36.x release) and a master branch
43 (which is ahead of any release) using the live property?
45 --
46 Ciaran McCreesh


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Live source based ebuild proposals Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>