1 |
On 17:29 Wed 14 Sep , Brian Harring wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 02:16:41PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
3 |
> > On 19:14 Tue 13 Sep , Brian Harring wrote: |
4 |
> > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 09:02:28PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
5 |
> > > > On 17:56 Tue 13 Sep , Mike Frysinger wrote: |
6 |
> > > > > useful enough for EAPI ? or should i just stick it into eutils.eclass |
7 |
> > > > > ? OR BOTH !? |
8 |
> > > > |
9 |
> > > > I prefer to avoid EAPI whenever possible, as it just makes things slower |
10 |
> > > > and more complex. |
11 |
> > > |
12 |
> > > Exactly the wrong approach; it winds up with master |
13 |
> > > repositories/overlays cloning the functionality all over the damn |
14 |
> > > place. |
15 |
> > |
16 |
> > Why are people cloning anything if it's in eutils.eclass in gentoo-x86? |
17 |
> |
18 |
> There are more repositories than just gentoo-x86, and overlay is *not* |
19 |
> the only configuration in use. |
20 |
|
21 |
Who else besides you is using any other configuration? Should we really |
22 |
give a crap about the 0.001% population with some weird setup when we're |
23 |
trying to improve things for the 99.999% one? |
24 |
|
25 |
> In the old days of the PM only handling a single overlay stack, what |
26 |
> you're suggesting would be less heinous- heinous in detail, but |
27 |
> pragmatic in reality. These days it's a regressive approach- |
28 |
> requiring everyone to slave gentoo-x86 isn't sane, nor is avoiding |
29 |
> eapi (resulting in people having to duplicate code into each |
30 |
> repository stack). |
31 |
|
32 |
I don't know many people who aren't using gentoo-x86 or a repo that |
33 |
pulls in changes directly from it. |
34 |
|
35 |
-- |
36 |
Thanks, |
37 |
Donnie |
38 |
|
39 |
Donnie Berkholz |
40 |
Council Member / Sr. Developer |
41 |
Gentoo Linux |
42 |
Blog: http://dberkholz.com |