On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:47:45 +0200 Gaute Hope <[email protected]> wrote: > > It doesn't map nicely onto the virtuals model. > > > > Also, we hate virtuals. > > Yes. Im not saying it would be the best, but keeping things consistent > is often worth a bit of pain.
Consistency is bad, if being consistent means not telling the package manager what's really going on. I'd rather have a half dozen different models so we can tell the package manager exactly what we really mean than one model that's stretched out in lots of different ways. See also: why || ( ) deps stink. > > > Which package is to be the CONTAINS package and which is the > > > CONTAINED_IN one(s) ? > > > > The relationship is obvious. If the relationship isn't obvious, it's > > not a suitable use of CONTAINS. > > Yeah, it would work great for this case. But its very likely to cause > confusion and be used wrong, like the provides/replaces-hell that Arch > linux got. If it is possible to get them to be used properly it isn't > a problem. This is Exherbo. We don't have to worry about people misusing things. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Exherbo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.exherbo.org/mailman/listinfo/exherbo-dev
