| 1 |
On Friday 04 November 2005 23:26, Xavier Neys wrote: |
| 2 |
> Nathan L. Adams wrote: |
| 3 |
> > One source: http://errata.gentoo.org/ |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > Push that out to as many alternate sources as you like (RSS feeds, |
| 6 |
> > summaries in emerge --news, forums post, etc.), but make it known that |
| 7 |
> > the website is *the* source (your alternate sources should point back to |
| 8 |
> > it). |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I beg to differ. The tree should be the central point because it's the only |
| 11 |
> known place where all users can receive relevant information on and for |
| 12 |
> each and every system they maintain right before they upgrade. |
| 13 |
> The warning and the logic that triggers its display should be part of |
| 14 |
> Portage. Sometimes, all that would need to be displayed is "run foo to fix |
| 15 |
> bar" or "Please do read http://bleh _before_ you upgrade foo". |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> If an "Upgrade guide to foo/bar for Gentoo" is required, you need an author |
| 18 |
> to write it, not extra code or an extra web site. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I probably shouldn't have included the sarcastic comment in my only other |
| 21 |
reply to this thread, but the rest of it was completely serious. People are |
| 22 |
under the mistaken impression that the ebuild tree is required to use |
| 23 |
portage. This is wrong and will become more and more wrong as time goes by. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
If there is not a specific need for this news stuff to go into the tree then |
| 26 |
it shouldn't be there. If there is a specific need (ie. it is tied to |
| 27 |
packages) what difference is there to the existing ChangeLog? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives