| 1 |
Hi all, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
here's a quote from the Council 20140826 summary: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> Dynamic dependencies in Portage |
| 6 |
> =============================== |
| 7 |
> During discussion, is was remarked that some changes, e.g. to |
| 8 |
> dependencies in eclasses, could require mass rebuilds of packages. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Vote: |
| 11 |
> - "The council asks the Portage team to first outline their long-term |
| 12 |
> plan regarding removal or replacement of dynamic dependencies, |
| 13 |
> before they remove this feature. In particular, tree policies and |
| 14 |
> the handling of eclasses and virtuals need to be clarified." |
| 15 |
> Accepted unanimously. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Since there seems to be interest in the Portage team to go ahead with that |
| 18 |
plan, I'd like to ask about the tree policies and the handling of eclasses and |
| 19 |
virtuals. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I guess we'd appreciate this as a prerequisite for being able to give the plan |
| 22 |
future council support. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Cheers, |
| 25 |
Andreas |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Andreas K. Huettel |
| 29 |
Gentoo Linux developer |
| 30 |
perl, office, comrel, council |
Archives