| 1 |
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 2:34 PM Matthias Maier <tamiko@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022, at 15:47 CST, Matt Turner <mattst88@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > [...] |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > I wouldn't block anyone from doing this, but it's not something I'm |
| 8 |
> > personally interested in pursuing. I see very little value here. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I did not intend to imply that you should do anything. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I just want to point out that we had been educating developers for using |
| 13 |
> "repoman" to commit for a long time and looking at the "git log" history |
| 14 |
> shows that repoman is still used by a sizable number of developers |
| 15 |
> (around 50%-ish). |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I think you just made that number up :) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> So, it would be very nice to have a somewhat official "blessed" |
| 20 |
> alternative in place. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> For example, dev-util/pkgdev was suggested as an alternative, but I |
| 24 |
> cannot assess whether this is indeed a viable alternative. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Why not? Give it a try. |
Archives