1 |
On Saturday 06 December 2003 17:44, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
2 |
> It's not getting ahead of things! That's a requirement that's not |
3 |
> covered yet. "Package definition should be powerful but simple with a |
4 |
> small learning curve" or something to that effect. |
5 |
|
6 |
Hm, isn't it a bit too late to change ebuild format, with us sitting on 7000+ |
7 |
ebuilds? The only reasonable way to do so is to make it structurally |
8 |
compatible and create a converter tool. Even then this is a major endeavor |
9 |
that would require a very good reason (nothing short of deadly limitations of |
10 |
the present format, which I woudn't say is the case). Furthermore, this would |
11 |
require wide publicity and even votes if we do not want to alienate users, as |
12 |
this is the change that definitely will affect them (take a look at number of |
13 |
new ebuild submissions ;)). |
14 |
|
15 |
But then I don't really see the problem with present format. bash involvment |
16 |
is really necessary only during the pkg_* and src_* steps, when a lot of |
17 |
other stuff is going to happen anyway, so this is hardly a bottleneck. To get |
18 |
definitions of various vars and dependency information out is trivial and can |
19 |
be done in anything. That bash is involved in this step at present is |
20 |
unfortunate, but there were reasons for it and it definitely may be undone |
21 |
even for the present portage. |
22 |
|
23 |
George |
24 |
|
25 |
|
26 |
|
27 |
-- |
28 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |