| 1 |
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 17:47:58 +0100 |
| 2 |
Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Maybe we can let the package managers only perceive it as keyworded or |
| 4 |
> stable if all of its dependencies are keyworded or stable on the |
| 5 |
> architecture that the user runs. Then we can have repoman just ignore |
| 6 |
> checking dependencies' keywords when we keyword or stabilize them. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Not sure how implementable this idea is though... |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
It's going to hurt for four reasons that I can think of right now. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Firstly, things you think are "obviously portable" sometimes aren't. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Secondly, users already get confused by "stable use masks". This is |
| 15 |
going to be even worse: users aren't going to understand why a noarch |
| 16 |
package isn't available for them. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Thirdly, you have to decide how to deal with long chains and cycles in |
| 19 |
noarch dependencies. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Fourthly, the interaction with || deps is an awful mess. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives