1 |
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 15:29:23 +0100 |
2 |
"Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò" <flameeyes@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> To bring ~x86-fbsd keywording in main tree, we mainly need to move a |
5 |
> true profile in the tree, not a dummy one, mark it as indev and start |
6 |
> the keywording. (I've already cleaned up the default-bsd/fbsd profile |
7 |
> so that it does work with the current base/ profile. |
8 |
> As long as virtual/libc is not in the dependencies, it shouldn't |
9 |
> trigger any kind of problems to leave the sys-freebsd category in the |
10 |
> overlay, if we really need to start needing that, I'll see to make |
11 |
> the ebuild quality level. |
12 |
|
13 |
My main objection here is "If it's worth doing, it's worth doing |
14 |
properly." I'd rather see the keywords and system ebuilds merged at the |
15 |
same time, so we don't end up with some half-system that has keywords |
16 |
in the tree but can't be installed. |
17 |
|
18 |
> It's not going to be a quick thing, as I'm mostly alone with |
19 |
> Gentoo/FreeBSD right now (help is always welcome), but times are |
20 |
> mature so that I can provide a decent experience to users. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> Can anybody name a showstopper to this? |
23 |
|
24 |
As far as I'm concerned the main reason this has been almost exclusively |
25 |
in overlay for so long is that we can rework things much more easily |
26 |
without worrying about breaking backwards compatibility or upgrade |
27 |
paths. If it's in a state where that's not likely to be an issue any |
28 |
more then I'd be in favour of merging it, as long it's done right. That |
29 |
in itself will of course be a non-trivial task, but I can awake from my |
30 |
BSD-related hibernation to get it done if it's reckoned to be a good |
31 |
idea and unlikely to break anything. |
32 |
|
33 |
On the other hand, I don't want to do this if there are serious |
34 |
objections from other devs, so any opinions from outside gentoo-alt are |
35 |
welcome. |
36 |
-- |
37 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |