| 1 |
On Fri, 2004-12-03 at 23:32 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> Heh.. It'd take about 2 minutes to write and test the 3 lines of code to |
| 3 |
> implement said enhancement. The question is, is this the correct enhancement. |
| 4 |
> If so, why? I'd be more inclined to use a file to define a profile as being |
| 5 |
> "valid" rather than "invalid". |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Perhaps a "description" file that describes the purpose of that profile. |
| 8 |
> Perhaps even a metadata.xml that contains the purpose of that specific |
| 9 |
> profile directory within its cascade as well as a flag indicating to portage |
| 10 |
> whether it's intented to be linked to. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I tend to like something like this better. Then we could use the same |
| 13 |
file to notify of profile deprecation, whether a profile is |
| 14 |
inherit-only, or anything else that we come up with in the future. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 18 |
Release Engineering - Operational/QA Manager |
| 19 |
Games - Developer |
| 20 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives