| 1 |
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Anthony G. Basile <blueness@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Shallow profiles avoid this. Also "features" avoid this (the |
| 3 |
> closest thing we have to mix-ins) provided they operate on a set of |
| 4 |
> flags/packages orthogonal to the rest of the stack. You then have shallow |
| 5 |
> base and you can add as many features as you like in, in any order, |
| 6 |
> confident that one will not clobber stuff from another since each feature is |
| 7 |
> well separated. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
That was my thinking as well. If we had categories of profiles and |
| 10 |
set up the rules to try to keep things orthogonal then we're going to |
| 11 |
be better off. Also, things like feature profiles should try to be |
| 12 |
additive in nature. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Rich |
Archives