Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Repoman SVN support
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 17:05:24
Message-Id: 456877A1.6050703@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Repoman SVN support by Fabian Groffen
1 Fabian Groffen wrote:
2 > On 25-11-2006 03:00:10 -0500, Alec Warner wrote:
3 >> Fabian Groffen wrote:
4 >>> Hi all,
5 >>>
6 >>> Please find attached the patch of the prefix repoman sources against the
7 >>> current trunk. I hope I removed all hunks that have prefix-only
8 >>> changes.
9 >> You realize I wrote generic SCM support into repoman over the summer
10 >> right? :P It was never merged (afaik I slacked on it, but also because
11 >
12 > Ehhhh no... probably because at that time I wasn't making my hands dirty
13 > on portage code.
14 >
15 >> it uses Popen and you pesky OSX folks are stuck on python2.3, so I need
16 >> to convert to portage.spawn).
17 >
18 > You can drop that, as I already require python 2.4, since portage needs
19 > at least 2.3.1 currently and I don't feel like checking with an older
20 > version to see if it breaks more. During bootstrapping I first install
21 > python 2.4. On a slightly related side note: you can also drop all your
22 > bash-2 code, as we end up running bash-3 too. Would only be nice if the
23 > basic functionally would work with bash-2, otherwise I need to bootstrap
24 > bash too. (Worth the time if it simplifies portage.)
25 >
26
27 ZOMG, I love you long time. *shudders at python 2.3*
28
29 >> However the support was generic, so for pretty much any system that 'is
30 >> kinda like cvs/svn' should work fine with a few tweaks to the exec
31 >> mapping. <bias>This of course excludes GIT, since it's a huge
32 >> non-standard piece of crap.</bias>
33 >
34 > Great! I feel that SVN won't be the only thing folks use, so I'm
35 > looking forward to your interface from a (hopefully) functional view
36 > point.
37 >
38
39 I haven't actually tried the others, but the support should be trivial
40 assuming they have similar commands and output (yay regex...oh wait, not
41 quite yay :) )
42
43 >> I may work on fixing that code up and putting it into HEAD before I retire.
44 >
45 > Ehhhh... what? The first is nice, the latter for sure isn't.
46
47 We will see; I may stay on and do both, but I don't have a ton of time
48 to work on stuff and it makes me feel guilty, hence trying to clean up
49 loose ends around here.
50
51 --
52 gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list