Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Refactoring of emerge code

[m h]

Alec-

What is the status of my patches?  I'm assumming that they are
rejected...  I'm curious the know the reason.   If the plan is to
migrate to a new improved version of portage (sooner rather than
later), then maybe I'll try to help out Brian with his efforts.

If current version of portage is going to be around for a while, why
the objection to cleaning up the code?

Not meaning to fan any flames here.  I'm not on IRC 24-7, so I
probably miss a lot of the action.

thanks

matt

On 5/2/06, m h <sesquile@×××××.com> wrote:
> Here's a stab at pre10...
> The order of application is the order of explanation:
>
> globals.diff - remove most globals
> main_emerge.diff - add __main__ section
> emergelint.diff - remove some obvious lint issues (unused/non-existent vars)
> emergepychecker.diff - remove unused (and repeated) imports
>
> feedback is welcome.
>
> -matt
>
> On 5/1/06, m h <sesquile@×××××.com> wrote:
> > Based on the recent "Stabilizing portage 2.1" thread, should I provide
> > patches based on pre9 or pre10?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > matt
> >
> > On 4/30/06, Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o> wrote:
> > > m h wrote:
> > > > OK will do that.  Since, I'm not a patching pro, can you suggest a
> > > > good way of creating a series of patches that apply on top of each
> > > > other?  (I'd like to do it the "right" way)
> > >
> > > I suggest
> > > dev-util/quilt -- if you like GUIs, try dev-util/gquilt.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Donnie
> > > --
> > > gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>

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