1 |
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:05:01 +0200 |
2 |
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> Piotr JaroszyĆski wrote: |
5 |
> > Hello, |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I |
8 |
> > have a few technical questions for you: |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > 1. GLEP54 |
11 |
> |
12 |
> Just for fun I took some of the ideas about alternative management of |
13 |
> the issue and specified the features it makes it worth changing |
14 |
> (better management and automated snapshot generation from the live |
15 |
> ebuild). |
16 |
> |
17 |
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero/glep/liveebuild.rst |
18 |
> |
19 |
> I'd like to see some comment on it (I put it in glep form just now so |
20 |
> it isn't exactly perfect) |
21 |
|
22 |
Ignoring possible semantic issues for the moment, I'd be against this |
23 |
simply because it would require the PM to be aware of the current |
24 |
revision of the repository and to transform it into a integer value |
25 |
(trivial for SVN, not so trivial for CVS for example). Which in turn |
26 |
either means that the PM has to internally support the SCMs or support |
27 |
some new phase functions to extract the revision. |
28 |
Plus it has similar (unstated) transition issues as GLEP-54, just avoids |
29 |
a new comparison algorithm and the CPV vs. atom issue. |
30 |
|
31 |
Marius |
32 |
-- |
33 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |