At Mon, 14 Oct 2013 20:22:06 -0500,
John Chilton wrote:
> Simon,
>   Very cool! I have two concerns. Rather than adding a new
> configuration option I think I would prefer to just check the
> configured dependency resolvers and then infer from them if the tool
> shed will be used. The configuration option strikes me as having to
> configure the same thing twice, and this change would make your setup
> slightly easier. Do you have any objection to me reworking your patch
> to do this? On the other hand, perhaps it is made more clear to the
> deployer that they are definitely disabling tool dependency
> installations if they have to add the explicit option this way.

Hi John,

I have no problem with you reworking it in that way.  There are two reasons
I didn't do that myself:

1. I would have had to change the interface to the dependency
   resolvers somehow to support this query, and I wasn't sure that was
   a good thing.

2. I wanted to make it explicit that toolshed package installation was
   disabled in this case, as I thought that would make it more likely
   this change gets accepted into the mainline.

Whichever way you Greg and Dave are happy with is OK by me.
Actually, I like your implicit approach better, so hope that's the one
that gets agreed.

Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

To search Galaxy mailing lists use the unified search at:

Reply via email to