| 1 |
Brian Harring wrote: [Mon Sep 04 2006, 01:04:21AM CDT] |
| 2 |
> > 33 (eclass restructuring) |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> You left out the char indicating your intention here; 33 likely will |
| 5 |
> have to be revisited in light of original intentions for it and how |
| 6 |
> paludis has implemented their equiv (and no, that's not a potshot). |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> 33 is bound to an EAPI bump most likely anyways, so probably will be |
| 9 |
> revisited when someone pushes a EAPI=1 glep (few months for me I'd |
| 10 |
> expect). |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Thanks, that's a big help. It's "M" for now, w/ a note that future |
| 13 |
revisions are expected. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> > 37 (virtuals deprecation) --> F? (Isn't this already implemented?) |
| 16 |
> No, actually; |
| 17 |
> A) no package.prefer |
| 18 |
> B) (bad jason), the consistancy section, it actually was a req of the |
| 19 |
> metapkg conversion that portages resolver go either -D by default, or |
| 20 |
> metapkgs be marked in some fashion so that portage knows to always go |
| 21 |
> one level deeper when encountering a metapkg. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
37 is now marked "d" since reality and the GLEP seem to have diverged. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> > 49 (alt package manager 1) --> R (by council; sane API preferred) |
| 26 |
> > 50 (alt package manager 2) --> R (by council; sane API preferred) |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Might want to clarify the "sane API preferred" bit. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Sorry, I should have been more precise. The council rejected both |
| 31 |
GLEPs in favor of starting with a Gentoo package manager API (which |
| 32 |
spb is slowly assembling), and then requiring in-tree package |
| 33 |
managers to implement that API. Or at least that was my understanding |
| 34 |
of that meeting. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Thanks! |
| 37 |
-g2boojum- |
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
Grant Goodyear |
| 40 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 41 |
g2boojum@g.o |
| 42 |
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum |
| 43 |
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 |
Archives