Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo: State of the Union
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 17:56:11
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo: State of the Union by "Jan Kundrát"
1 Jan Kundrát wrote:
2 > Ryan Phillips wrote:
3 >> Stable and unstable keywords are a hack on top of a version control
4 >> system. We wouldn't have them if gentoo used an SCM that supports true
5 >> branches. There would be no need.
6 >
7 > Umm, I'm not an ebuild dev, but how would users mix stable and unstable
8 > packages in such a case?
10 They would probably have to check out two trees. But the two trees
11 combined would likely be the same size as the single tree now, since a
12 lot of packages have at least two ebuilds available, one ~arch and one
13 stable.
15 The real showstopper in my mind is that having a single ~arch and a
16 single stable tree means you can't selectively stable things on
17 different architectures at different times.
19 Thanks,
20 Donnie
21 --
22 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo: State of the Union Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o>