Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Next major version

[warnera6]

Kristian Benoit wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 14:19 -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
>
>>Christopher Korn wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>Hi Jason and other folks,
>>>>>I saw your last comment on
>>>>>http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73350 about most the these
>>>>>feature to be present in the next major version. That is really
>>>>>great to read.
>>>>>
>>>>>On that subject, I'd like to have an idea about when we should
>>>>>expect that next version.
>>>>>
>>>>>That said, I think it would be helpful to have a portage developper
>>>>>site. Perhaps there is and I dont know...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  That would require someone writing one, so if you are
>>>>volunteering ;)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Writing is not the problem. But without (proper) information it is hard
>>>to write a documentation or something like this.
>>>
>>>
>>>Chris
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I had a wiki that attempted to cover portage-2.0 api documentation as
>>well as anything written for 2.1 but lost much of the work in a
>>transition from windows to linux ( I screwed up the SQl backups :) ).
>>I thought about putting something up on the devwiki but I haven't
>>proposed anything because no one really likes a wiki for API docs.
>>
>>As for API docs, there are none at present; and there are no plans for
>>any stable docs, IIRC.
>>
>>As for a developer website, what kinds of information are you looking for?
>
>
> Like you talked about, doc would be nice, Jason has some doc, api doc...
> here:
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~jstubbs/
> but it does not look and is not official.
>
> I remember, when I started using Gentoo, reading that portage is a stand
> alone tool, it is not bind into Gentoo in anyway, someone could use it
> on redhat, debian, lfs...
>
> Back then I was using lfs so I thought portage could be the way to go on
> lfs, but I realized that Gentoo fit my needs and I did'nt have to
> compile everything by hand anymore and still have everything compiled by
> my machines :) OH JOY !!!
>
> But 5 years or so later, the only official place to get portage releases
> is still in the gentoo mirrors. There is no RSS feed or anything like
> that. I still believe that portage has the potential to be so powerful
> that redhat, debian, ... could be building their packages using portage,
> managing their own tree, having night build.
>
> The problem is see, is that the initial portage vision (or perhaps my
> initial vision, a vision I still have) has not been carried along with
> it's developpement.
   "portage-ng", as it were?  IMHO portage is a far cry from what is 
needed for any kind of intense platform development.  I'm not going to 
harp on it's problems; everyone already knows what they are and we have 
people who are dedicated to working on it.  No one has seen the code 
from portage-ng, so it was abandoned.  The goals set for 2.1 and beyond 
seem lofty, and integrating portage into a non-gentoo environment is 
tricky at best, even with a nicely rewritten API.  I don't see why other 
distributions would turn to our tools when theirs work perfectly fine in 
90% of cases.  However, if they end up benefitting, more power to them. 
  Thats why we are all here, is it not?

>
> Having an official web site, doc, ... will help getting visibility and
> effort from the rest of the world thus we'll have better tools and
> eventually extend portage beyond Gentoo.
>
> Kristian
>

-- 
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list