Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Stephen Bennett <spb@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Defining the Tree: a proto-GLEP.
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 22:59:10
Message-Id: 20060613000043.0c6f8777@localhost
1 Continuing in the series of issues raised during the previous package
2 manager discussions, I'd like to continue by mentioning the tree
3 format. At present, it isn't defined beyond "what the current portage
4 supports", which is frankly a fairly silly way to do things. Following
5 discussion in #gentoo-portage, I'd like to set out to change that.
6
7 My current idea is to draw up a formal specification of what ebuilds
8 are allowed to do, and what to assume about the environment in which
9 they run, as well as defining the formats of everything under
10 profiles/, metadata.xml files, and other auxiliary information in the
11 tree. I would envision the first version of this document to more or
12 less codify existing practise, perhaps excluding some dubious tricks
13 that are known to break in some cases. Generally, it should be possible
14 to make the tree conform to the first version of the specification by
15 changes no more significant than currently have QA bugs filed for them.
16
17 It seems fairly obvious that any effort of this kind could potentially
18 have implications, albeit hopefully very minor, across more or less all
19 aspects of the tree, and so I'd like to seek as wide a range of input
20 as possible before going ahead with it. The QA and Portage teams, based
21 on my enquiries in IRC, seem broadly in favour, and I would imagine
22 that this could be very helpful to Gentoo/ALT as well, so I'd like
23 opinions from others at this point. Would you support such an effort,
24 whether passively or actively? Would you oppose it? If so, why? Final
25 implementation of it would I assume require the Council's approval;
26 while I won't ask at this stage for a formal discussion I'd appreciate
27 the views of its members on whether such an initiative is likely to
28 pass.
29
30 Any input is gratefully received.
31 --
32 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Defining the Tree: a proto-GLEP. Luis Francisco Araujo <araujo@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Defining the Tree: a proto-GLEP. Marius Mauch <genone@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Defining the Tree: a proto-GLEP. "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Defining the Tree: a proto-GLEP. Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Defining the Tree: a proto-GLEP. Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o>