| 1 |
Got this message after I answered previous :-). |
| 2 |
It looks like the proposal will address the issue you are concerned with. If |
| 3 |
user selects to see unstable (confirmed or even all) packages he will |
| 4 |
download all these ebuild on the next rsync and then will be able to use |
| 5 |
gentool or gentoolkit on local copy! |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
George |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
On Tuesday 16 April 2002 17:33, you wrote: |
| 10 |
> hmmm...I never intended to imply that the ebuild repository and bugs |
| 11 |
> wouldn't be integrated....only that the avg joe downloader wouldn't be |
| 12 |
> forced to learn a developer tool and that the ebuild repository would |
| 13 |
> automatically push issues into the bugs database. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> To take this step up another notch, when bugs are fixed for a particular |
| 16 |
> package, the issues surrounding the bug are suppressed to just a link |
| 17 |
> called "past bugs" but when a bug is actively open, then the issues for |
| 18 |
> that bug are displayed prominently for the end user so he can quickly |
| 19 |
> determine if the package is going to meet his needs. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> This is something that would be most important to me as a new Linux |
| 22 |
> user...I'm trying to find |
| 23 |
> good quality packages and I know little about their background, but if I |
| 24 |
> can read comments about them and see that there are bug issues at the |
| 25 |
> moment, I can choose to move on to another package or attempt to work |
| 26 |
> around the known bug issues. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Michael |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> At 01:26 AM 3/17/2002 +0100, you wrote: |
| 31 |
> >On Saturday 16 March 2002 23:09, Brent Cook wrote: |
| 32 |
> > > Do you essentially mean http://www.freshports.org/ with |
| 33 |
> > > comments? |
| 34 |
> > |
| 35 |
> >that's cool, but imho there should be some way to leverage |
| 36 |
> >bugs.gentoo.org by integrating both. i think it would be an |
| 37 |
> >overkill having a separate "ebuild repository", it should rather |
| 38 |
> >be kept central. |
| 39 |
> > |
| 40 |
> >probably a simple link like |
| 41 |
> > |
| 42 |
> >http://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?component=Ebuilds |
| 43 |
> > |
| 44 |
> >(add your date constraints) |
| 45 |
> > |
| 46 |
> >would be sufficient if we just agreed on a standardized way how |
| 47 |
> >ebuild submissions (and error reports) have to be made. this |
| 48 |
> >could be done by "forcing" a formatted summary field. e.g. for |
| 49 |
> >ebuild submissions: |
| 50 |
> > |
| 51 |
> >${P} ${DESCRIPTION} |
| 52 |
> > |
| 53 |
> >this would be suitable for most users (as gentoo mainly targets |
| 54 |
> >developers/professionals and as the ebuild names are usually |
| 55 |
> >self-explanatory). disclaimer: i do not know whether forcing |
| 56 |
> >field formats is possible with bugzilla. a voting feature |
| 57 |
> >would be nice too. |
| 58 |
> > |
| 59 |
> >rgds |
| 60 |
> > |
| 61 |
> >dan |
| 62 |
> > |
| 63 |
> >-- |
| 64 |
> > ...::: Daniel Mettler | http://www.numlock.ch :::.... |
| 65 |
> > |
| 66 |
> >_______________________________________________ |
| 67 |
> >gentoo-dev mailing list |
| 68 |
> >gentoo-dev@g.o |
| 69 |
> >http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev |
| 70 |
> |
| 71 |
> President |
| 72 |
> www.cybrains.net |
| 73 |
> |
| 74 |
> "All things should be as simple as possible, but no simpler" -- Albert |
| 75 |
> Einstein |
| 76 |
> |
| 77 |
> _______________________________________________ |
| 78 |
> gentoo-dev mailing list |
| 79 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o |
| 80 |
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev |
Archives