| 1 |
Please reply on gentoo-portage-dev, _not_ on gentoo-dev, thanks. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
One missing feature in portage is the lack of package sets. Before we |
| 4 |
(re)start working on that however I'd like to get some feedback about |
| 5 |
what properties/features people would expect from portage package set |
| 6 |
support. |
| 7 |
Some key questions: |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
- should they simply act like aliases for multiple packages? E.g. |
| 10 |
should `emerge -C sets/kde` be equivalent to `emerge -C kdepkg1 kdepkg2 |
| 11 |
kdepkg3 ...`? Or does the behavior need to be "smarter" in some ways? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
- what kind of atoms should be supported in sets? Simple and versioned |
| 14 |
atoms for sure, but what about complex atoms (use-conditional, any-of, |
| 15 |
blockers)? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
- should sets be supported everywhere, or only in selected use cases? |
| 18 |
(everywhere would include depstrings for example) |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
- what use cases are there for package sets? Other than the established |
| 21 |
"system" and "world", and the planned "all" and "security" sets. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
- how/where should sets be stored/distributed? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Please reply on gentoo-portage-dev, _not_ on gentoo-dev, thanks. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Marius |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be |
| 33 |
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. |
Archives