| 1 |
On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 21:03:32 -0700 |
| 2 |
"Daniel Robbins" <drobbins.daniel@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> 1) maintain the existing baselayout and don't change things at all. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Right, that's baselayout-1 |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> 2) start a new package called fastlayout and do whatever you wanna do |
| 9 |
> with it. Be as innovative as you want to be with it. Change all the |
| 10 |
> stuff in it that you want to change. Get people to test it and work on |
| 11 |
> it with you. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Right, that's baselayout-2. It can go in the tree package.masked with |
| 14 |
massive warnings in the ebuild "WILL BREAK FOR SYSTEM FOO!" for people |
| 15 |
to test. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> I have learned from experience that you never want to start a project |
| 18 |
> and call it "something"-ng. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
To be fair, that was a knee-jerk reaction. I wanted a discussion about |
| 21 |
a new config style, not one about the merits of bash as that would turn |
| 22 |
into a predictable flamewar. You can count the relevant posts on one |
| 23 |
hand sadly. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I've always seen this as baselayout-2. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> People don't like change unless they can see the obvious |
| 28 |
> benefits of such change. And it is hard for people to see these |
| 29 |
> benefits when you are just in the planning stages. That's what we call |
| 30 |
> a catch-22. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Again, people won't *have* to change. It's already been demonstrated |
| 33 |
that people can keep their array based configs if they so choose. Or |
| 34 |
are you saying that baselayout should never change? |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
As to where the distros are going, well, there's upstart and others. Of |
| 37 |
course, none of them work with our init scripts and all of them force a |
| 38 |
posix shell afaik. So from that perspective, allowing posix init |
| 39 |
scripts is mirroring where others are going. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Thanks |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Roy |
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives