Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o>
To: axs@g.o
Cc: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] pkgcore bikeshed (was Portage team)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 15:32:38
Message-Id: 20140113163136.26635d92@TOMWIJ-GENTOO
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] pkgcore bikeshed (was Portage team) by Ian Stakenvicius
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 09:56:13 -0500
5 Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> wrote:
6
7 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
8 > Hash: SHA256
9 >
10 > On 13/01/14 09:46 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
11 > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:15:37 +0700 "C. Bergström"
12 > > <cbergstrom@×××××××××.com> wrote:
13 > >
14 > >> Long term the API to pkgcore could be beneficial, but again I'm
15 > >> not sure it's a game changer for users.
16 > >
17 > > Long term, we should have an independent API backend that tools
18 > > can query; not rewrite our tools every time users want to use them
19 > > with a different package manager.
20 >
21 > ..you mean, define the API and include it in PMS? how much
22 > bureaucracy will that need to occur?
23
24 The API can be separate of the PMS. The bureaucracy needed for an API
25 to provide to tools, that doesn't need as much involvement as PMS.
26
27 - --
28 With kind regards,
29
30 Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
31 Gentoo Developer
32
33 E-mail address : TomWij@g.o
34 GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D
35 GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
36 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
37 Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
38
39 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS1AbYAAoJEJWyH81tNOV90DEIAIk+zQe4vgJ2XWchQLET064Q
40 mij/sQQRcI52PZwXFfRh23G+dKkywsPIg+US5KmbWJTtT4UbbLFnn4KCRB/QZE6E
41 43wHYsKGMgTovpkXQZEy8O4GbFUOb1k9DrsR05r91+QUUUmxxxi9ODq86kavtPVs
42 UaPyz3me4j3olHLSxzUtxJd5/AgHGwkH+YHtcWny2oaXNUIFpusIPRURqyFyE4xI
43 Leq/w8/nsmeCc25pPN4cbY6bBwOwCxsZZwik3gmz6FzrAVwCjuRvX8n7szl8viNr
44 Kd56odFjX/n7pAL+Rj52spz6TNcSe1H8IMkwI9rMYc/LYQSw+/uCGnAXeIxrzWY=
45 =F2d3
46 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----