| 1 |
Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 2 |
> > 0. What names for the tree/repository. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> "gentoo" |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
IMO this is the only really accurate name. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> (it's also the repo_name) |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
There you go. It already has the name gentoo. :) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> "portage" doesn't make sense, everything else is too long or |
| 14 |
> potentially confusing... |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Yes indeed. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 20 |
> > 0. What names for the tree/repository. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Suggestions: |
| 23 |
> gentoo-repo |
| 24 |
> gentoo-repository |
| 25 |
> gentoo-main |
| 26 |
> gentoo-repo-main |
| 27 |
> gentoo-repository-main |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
These are all terribly long and fairly redundant. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> > 1. We have some namespaces in Git: proj, dev, priv, data, sites, exp; should |
| 33 |
> > the tree be in one of those namespaces, a new namespace, or be without |
| 34 |
> > a namespace? git://anongit.gentoo.org/NEW-NAME.git. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> I'd suggest creating a repository(-ies) namespace (or maybe call it |
| 37 |
> repo(s)), since conceivably we might have more than one at some point, |
| 38 |
> overlays might end up in there at some point, etc. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
This is a good point. repos/gentoo.git or maybe ebuilds/gentoo.git |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Kent Fredric wrote: |
| 44 |
> Similarly in the "solve confusion as to purpose" for newbies: |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Please be careful to avoid creating "simple" names for things which |
| 47 |
are actually more complicated than a "simple" name can express |
| 48 |
accurately. That only creates even more confusion. Names need to |
| 49 |
be accurate and short. It's very difficult to find the right ones and |
| 50 |
it is an important matter. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
> gentoo-packages |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
No way, packages in Gentoo are .tbz2 files, not .ebuild files. Other |
| 56 |
distributions already confuse the naming of their packages with the |
| 57 |
files used to create the packages. Gentoo does not need to be that |
| 58 |
stupid. |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
> gentoo-ebuilds |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
An ebuilds namespace may not be such a bad idea, especially if later |
| 64 |
on there will be more ebuild repos next to the gentoo one. |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
Manuel Rüger wrote: |
| 68 |
> iirc most deb and rpm based distributions use "main" for their central |
| 69 |
> repository, so +1 for gentoo-main. |
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
Gentoo is significantly different from simple binary distributions - |
| 72 |
let's not create unneccessary problems by copying their sillyness. |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
|
| 75 |
Thanks |
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
//Peter |
Archives