| 1 |
On Wednesday 14 December 2005 08:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 08:44:39 +0900 Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> wrote: |
| 5 |
> | Modifications are required to portage anyway. Why postpone it until |
| 6 |
> | after several readers are written and force all of them become broken? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Because there isn't a specification saying what the future changes to |
| 9 |
> Portage will be, so supporting said future changes straight off would |
| 10 |
> require a massively over-generalised, over-indirected solution. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
newsdir="$(portageq envvar PORTDIR)/metadata/news" |
| 13 |
newsdir="$(portageq newsdir gentoo)" |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Both have one level of indirection. The first has two hard coded elements. The |
| 16 |
first has one. Where is the massive over-indirection? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
The second allows future changes. The first does not. Where does the |
| 19 |
specification come into it? All that would be needed is to allow a user a |
| 20 |
method to name overlays and it'd be useful straight off the bat. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives