| 1 |
Lars Weiler posted |
| 2 |
<20050609133722.GN10291@×××××××××××××××××××××××××××××.de>, excerpted |
| 3 |
below, on Thu, 09 Jun 2005 15:37:22 +0200: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> * foser <foser@g.o> [05/06/09 15:19 +0200]: |
| 6 |
>> The point is that with his reordering implicit information was lost for |
| 7 |
>> no particular purpose. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> If you store implicit information in the keywords, then make them |
| 10 |
> explicit. That involves, find another way to store the data (like in |
| 11 |
> metadata), or discuss here about another way to store that data in the |
| 12 |
> keywords. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Could you give an example about the implicit data you store in the |
| 15 |
> keywords? So we can think about a solution. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Um... I expect foser considered that understood from the thread context. |
| 18 |
The "implicit data" under discussion is maintainer's arch and to a lessor |
| 19 |
degree order of arch adoption of the package. Maintainer arch was |
| 20 |
/traditionally/ listed first, with archs added left to right, so the |
| 21 |
newest arch added was always to the right. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
However, as the many arguments and examples in this thread demonstrate, |
| 24 |
that was never a reliable method for conveying the information in the |
| 25 |
first place, thus we have the proposal to make it alphabetical ordering, |
| 26 |
and to put maintainer's arch info in the metadata.xml file. So far, the |
| 27 |
change seems to be favored. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 31 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 32 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in |
| 33 |
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives