Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2012-06-12
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 00:03:08
Message-Id: 20120603232342.GA13841@linux1
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2012-06-12 by Ciaran McCreesh
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 01:38:32PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 12:42:45 +0300 > Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: > > When all there is required is dropping some "$@" to the Portage code > > and be done with it, and have everything be in consistent format... > > The question is not about the code, but about the design. Your design > doesn't make sense: there's no direct correspondence between functions > and phases, so it's not obvious where arguments to "default" get sent. > > "default" is for the easy cases. If you're wanting to do something > different, don't use it.
Also, default can be used as the starting point for a more complex install. For example, you can call default, then once that returns, modify the image by adding/removing/moving files, adding init scripts, etc. So I would also strongly disagree with a ban on calling default from the install phase. William