| 1 |
this is something we discussed about a month ago and never developed an |
| 2 |
official policy for then did we? george can you comment on this? |
| 3 |
perhaps its time we do |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
dave |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
On Wed, 2003-05-28 at 15:04, Matthew Kennedy wrote: |
| 8 |
> Jon Portnoy <avenj@g.o> writes: |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> > Policy is to avoid naming conflicts. :) |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > There are indeed ebuilds that conflict. Those are bugs that there is |
| 13 |
> > currently no clean fix for. Committing _more_ conflicting ebuilds is |
| 14 |
> > definitely not okay. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Jon (and others), |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> I'm not so sure. I have app-emacs and app-xemacs and there are |
| 20 |
> *many* ebuilds which "conflict" in their naming, and this is |
| 21 |
> intentional. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> For example, the "ilisp" package appears in both app-emacs and |
| 24 |
> app-xemacs. So if I'm to avoid this naming "conflict" because |
| 25 |
> somemone typing "emerge ilisp" might get "app-xemacs/ilisp" instead |
| 26 |
> of "app-emacs/ilisp", then naturally I should prefix the ebuild names |
| 27 |
> with "emacs" and "xemacs", right? So I'd end up with |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> emerge emacs-ilisp |
| 30 |
> or |
| 31 |
> emerge xemacs-ilisp |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> But wait! Thats what categories are for -- ie. defining some |
| 34 |
> namespace. Thus there's no need, and this more or less backs up my |
| 35 |
> argument that the category name + package name forms a "fully resolved |
| 36 |
> and unique" symbol for emerge to act upon. |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> So the user should do: |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> emerge app-emacs/ilisp |
| 41 |
> or |
| 42 |
> emerge app-xemacs/ilisp |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> What of the case where the user is surprised by the "short form" case: |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
> emerge ilisp |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> ...well this is where emerge should abort and report back to the user |
| 49 |
> something like this: "ERROR: Short form 'ilisp' matches |
| 50 |
> app-emacs/ilisp and app-xemacs/ilisp -- please use a fully qualified |
| 51 |
> name instead". (Currently emerge emerges the first one it sees.) |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> I really think ambiguities should be resolved by using the category |
| 54 |
> name -- otherwise I can't see why we sort packages into categories |
| 55 |
> at all. |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> Matt |
| 58 |
-- |
| 59 |
Dave Nellans |
| 60 |
http://lucy.wox.org/~dnellans/ |
| 61 |
dnellans@×××××××.edu |
Archives