| 1 |
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:17:03 +0100 |
| 2 |
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
> > No, but something can represent the most commonly used models. We |
| 5 |
> > can't do -scm packages for upstreams that do utterly crazy stuff |
| 6 |
> > anyway, so we'll stick to the reasonably sane ones. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> So we stick to a subset we assume is what we'd expect from upstream. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Yupyup. That was what we had in mind when we worked out -scm. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> > Topic branches can be covered by use flags. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> So I cannot track mob, master and devel at the same time with -scm |
| 15 |
> alone, I need to get useflag change deeply the ebuild behavior. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
If you're looking to track topics rather than versions, yes. Using |
| 18 |
versions to track topics gets extremely messy. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> > How do I track an upstream who has a 0.34 branch (which is equal to |
| 21 |
> > or ahead of the most recent 0.34.x release) a 0.36 branch (which |
| 22 |
> > is equal to or ahead of the most recent 0.36.x release) |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> In those cases is enough take the package version and add one w/out |
| 25 |
> requiring any additional version component... |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Be specific. Explain how this works when, say, 0.34.4 is current, you |
| 28 |
have a 0.34.5_live and 0.34.5 comes out. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> > and a master branch (which is ahead of any release) using the live |
| 31 |
> > property? |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> The current versioning alone cannot do it cleanly. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Hence -scm... |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives