| 1 |
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Alex Legler <a3li@g.o> wrote:
|
| 2 |
> On So, 2009-05-24 at 20:04 +0200, lxnay@××××××××××××.org wrote: |
| 3 |
>> [...] |
| 4 |
>> >> app-admin/equo (sabayon overlay -- Entropy Framework client) supports |
| 5 |
>> >> the postfix "@repository" to let users force the installation of a |
| 6 |
>> >> package from a specific repository. |
| 7 |
>> > |
| 8 |
>> > @ is used by Portage for sets. Paludis has been using ::repo for repo |
| 9 |
>> > dependencies for years. Why not go with the established syntax? |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> I wrote "postfix" not "prefix". Sets use "@" prefix. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Your @ is still a prefix for the repository name. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Yeah but "emerge @overlay" would be obviously illegal. So your argument is a bit pointless ;)
|
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> For usability's sake, please don't do this. I can imagine users getting |
| 19 |
> confused over the different meanings of the @ sign. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> I do not want to trigger a discussion like the one PHP had when choosing |
| 22 |
> namespace separators, but we got the "::" established in Paludis and |
| 23 |
> Paludis is used by way more Gentoo people than equo. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
"::" C++/PHP/whatever separator has nothing to do with the purpose of "@overlay".
|
| 26 |
Paludis is not a Gentoo project and doesn't follow Gentoo features validation rules.
|
| 27 |
So is Entropy. If Paludis has its own syntax it doesn't automatically mean that Gentoo Portage *has to* follow it.
|
| 28 |
I prefer a more democratic way => discussing here.
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> So it only seems logical to me to use the wider-known and at the same |
| 32 |
> time ambiguity-free "operator". |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> Alex |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
--
|
| 40 |
Fabio Erculiani |
Archives