Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Marius Mauch <genone@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@g.o
Cc: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage-NG implementation language(s)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 11:09:53
1 Hi,
3 Seeing this "language war" on -dev I think I should say again that the
4 component model should make us free from language restrictions. There is
5 no sense in saying "we should use language XXX for portage-ng" as the
6 goal should be that each component can be implemented in the best
7 fitting language. So it should be possible to have the dependency
8 resolver in prolog, the ebuild parser in perl, the frontend in python,
9 the storage backend in C and so on. Instead of arguing about the "best"
10 language for implementation we should discuss about the language for the
11 _interface_ for the component interaction.
12 Once we have decided on that we can start creating the global
13 architecture that describes which components interact with each other,
14 which components are mandatory or optional and so on. Later in that
15 process we can specify the first function signatures and start
16 implementing the individual components. Then and not earlier we have to
17 choose the implementation language.
18 I hope we can stop the "let's use XXX" discussion now.
20 Marius
22 --
23 Public Key at
25 In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
26 Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage-NG implementation language(s) Jason Stubbs <jasonbstubbs@×××××××××××.com>