| 1 |
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 03:11 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:25:17 -0400 |
| 3 |
> "William L. Thomson Jr." <wltjr@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > Hierarchy would be the following |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > snapshot -> dev -> build -> alpha -> beta .... |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> And that's where the problems start. As you said yourself _snapshot is |
| 10 |
> something universal so it doesn't really fit anywhere in the chain. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Yes, order wise snapshots might be quite confusing. Not sure if a well |
| 13 |
defined definition would clear that up. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> Similar for _build, it usually runs parallel to normal versioning (a |
| 16 |
> release also has a build number). |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
That's more something specific to say glassfish where builds are weekly |
| 19 |
https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/downloadsindex.html#Promoted_binary_builds |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
With major ones being milestones, similar to Netbeans. |
| 22 |
https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/downloadsindex.html#Milestone_binary_builds |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Glassfish alone is likely to comprise of a guestimated ~20 or so |
| 25 |
packages. It's Sun's formerly closed source J2EE stack for the most |
| 26 |
part. Very possible could be more, formerly know as WSDP |
| 27 |
http://java.sun.com/webservices/jwsdp/index.jsp |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> At best older |
| 30 |
> portage versions would ignore ebuilds using these new suffixes |
| 31 |
> resulting in confused users, worst case stuff starts breaking. |
| 32 |
> If you want to pursue this you should get some numbers of how many |
| 33 |
> packages could actually make use of these new features, it simply isn't |
| 34 |
> worth thinking about it for just a handful of packages. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
After others comments, this is definitely something for the future. If |
| 37 |
and a time comes that it's feasible to introduce such changes safely. I |
| 38 |
do agree before acceptable or implementation the amount of packages that |
| 39 |
can benefit from it would surely help justify it or not. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Now I doubt it's feasible for me alone to figure out if it can benefit |
| 42 |
all 4k+ packages :) So hopefully others can chime in briefly on if they |
| 43 |
can benefit or not. Maybe email me directly to I can start a tally. Only |
| 44 |
if you have packages that can benefit, no need otherwise. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
With that said, what percentage or ruff # of packages do you all think |
| 47 |
would need to benefit to justify it? That way if it's hard to find say |
| 48 |
50 and min is like 500+, then no reason to look into it any further. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
-- |
| 51 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
| 52 |
Gentoo/Java |
Archives