Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] new `usex` helper
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 03:59:55
Message-Id: 20110918035908.GB4525@comet.mayo.edu
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] new `usex` helper by Brian Harring
1 On 13:43 Fri 16 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
2 > What I said from the getgo and you're missing is that pushing EAPI
3 > implementation into the tree and ignoring EAPI, or having this notion
4 > that every repository must automatically use gentoo-x86 (pushing the
5 > format into the tree) is /wrong/;
6
7 I'm not necessarily requiring that every repository must automatically
8 use gentoo-x86 — just the ones that want to use features in an eclass
9 distributed with gentoo-x86. It sounds to me like the logical
10 consequence of what you're saying is that every useful function that's
11 now or could eventually be in an eclass must instead be incorporated
12 into EAPI. I guess I just don't see where you're drawing the line.
13
14 What I'm suggesting is that we should add useful stuff to eclasses by
15 default. If people want to use that stuff, they can stack on the
16 gentoo-x86 repo and inherit the eclass. I don't know why EAPI needs to
17 come into it at all.
18
19 > aside from meaning that the format definition can now *vary*, which is
20 > great for wasting dev time and screwing up compatibility, it opens up
21 > tweaking/customizing that functionality- aka,
22 > fragmentation/divergence.
23
24 People doing that outside gentoo-x86 should do it the same way as ones
25 within it, by bumping the eclass to a new unique name. Ideally one
26 that's not just a numeric value so it won't conflict with ours, in the
27 same way as EAPI naming.
28
29 > If we did the sort of thing you're basically pushing for, how long do
30 > you think it would be till funtoo added support for a new archive
31 > format to unpack? That's a *simple*, and *likely* example of how this
32 > can diverge.
33
34 So, what I'm getting out of this is that we should make it harder for
35 derivative distributions to innovate? Why should I care if they want to
36 do stuff with new archive formats?
37
38 > Further, doing as you propose means we're flat out, shit out of luck
39 > /ever/ distributing a usable cache for standalone repositories. If
40 > they're bound to the changes of another repository, distributing a
41 > cache in parallel is pointless (and not doable in current form since
42 > metadata/cache lacks necessary eclass validation data for overlay
43 > inheritance).
44
45 Not much different from other cross-repository dependencies; you have to
46 keep everything in lockstep because who knows what other people will do
47 with their repos. Maybe people would want to distribute their own copies
48 of forked dependent repositories too, I haven't thought much about it.
49
50 --
51 Thanks,
52 Donnie
53
54 Donnie Berkholz
55 Council Member / Sr. Developer
56 Gentoo Linux
57 Blog: http://dberkholz.com

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] new `usex` helper Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>