| 1 |
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 12:16 PM, james <garftd@×××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 06/10/2016 08:00 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> The Exherbo model is not "packages are all over the place and there is |
| 6 |
>> no coordination whatsoever". The model is "packages that lots of people |
| 7 |
>> use are in a small number of core repositories and are carefully dealt |
| 8 |
>> with to avoid breakages, |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Kinda like the @system + selected profile package list? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I suspect it would be more like all core dependencies and common |
| 14 |
packages. So, think KDE, Gnome, X11, python, perl, etc. We're not |
| 15 |
just talking @system. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Basically any package that any average person is reasonably likely to |
| 18 |
be familiar with. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
There is a very long tail of stuff that would be outside of the |
| 21 |
official repos, but you wouldn't care about 99% of it, which is why it |
| 22 |
would be outside the official repos. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
And my understanding again for Exherbo is that they use code review in |
| 25 |
all official repos, so even if you're the only maintainer of a package |
| 26 |
and it is in your own git repo, you're still going to put your commits |
| 27 |
through code review before you commit them to your own repo. It isn't |
| 28 |
like the Gentoo overlay model where they're all anything-goes. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Rich |
Archives