| 1 |
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 09:11:53 +0900 Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
| Regardless of what you think about the current plans for multiple |
| 4 |
| repository support, the details that readers will need to know wont |
| 5 |
| change. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Incorrect. Right now, readers should ignore news-blah.unread and only |
| 8 |
pay attention to news.unread. Readers will have to be updated to deal |
| 9 |
with multiple repositories whenever the multiple repositories GLEP is |
| 10 |
approved. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
| > | Even before multiple respositories are properly supported, I |
| 13 |
| > | guarantee bugs about support for this in portage overlays. With |
| 14 |
| > | the above, we would be able to add that support. Without it, all |
| 15 |
| > | we can do is put a big CANTFIX. |
| 16 |
| > |
| 17 |
| > Overlay is not the same as multiple repository support. |
| 18 |
| |
| 19 |
| There's no difference as far as readers go. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Sure there is. there's no metadata/ directory in overlays. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
| Nope, which is why news.read shouldn't be specified. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
news.read is specified because there was demand for it the last time |
| 26 |
around. It's staying specified because the reasons given were based |
| 27 |
upon convincing use cases rather than random speculation. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (I can kill you with my brain) |
| 31 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
| 32 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |
Archives