1 |
On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 10:41:57 +0100 |
2 |
Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
3 |
> Use PDEPEND. |
4 |
|
5 |
PDEPEND has a different meaning, and isn't suitable for runtime |
6 |
dependencies. |
7 |
|
8 |
> While I like labels they need to be discussed more on-list as well as |
9 |
> on bugzilla (it's not reasonable for you simply to advertise them and |
10 |
> then close down discussion.) For instance, there is no reason |
11 |
> everything has to be loaded into just one extant metadatum, not do |
12 |
> they preclude new metadata (such as a SRC_DEP here.) |
13 |
|
14 |
Labels can be discussed on-list whenever there's a chance in hell of |
15 |
Portage implementing any non-trivial new features. |
16 |
|
17 |
Anyway, I'm going with the second wording in the original email. It |
18 |
seems fairly clear that most people aren't understanding the issue, and |
19 |
are jumping in and offering opinions without having looked at the tree |
20 |
(and no, I'm not going to give examples, because that'll just |
21 |
degenerate into "oh, so we can change this one particular case to do |
22 |
$blah", whilst missing the bigger point). Of everything suggested, only |
23 |
the two original wordings are correct, and of those two, the second is |
24 |
better defined. |
25 |
|
26 |
-- |
27 |
Ciaran McCreesh |