On Sat, 2005-01-22 at 01:23 -0600, Daniel Goller wrote:
> John Mylchreest wrote:
> > Just to make you aware, I dicussed this some time ago and keep meaning
> > to write a GLEP for it.
> > Basically, it was to convert the eclasses so they are located in their
> > own directory under the main eclass name. for example:
> > 
> > ${PORTDIR}/eclass/kernel/kernel.eclass
> > ${PORTDIR}/eclass/kernel-2.eclass
> 
> why is kernel-2.eclass not also in the dir kernel, is that where it was 
> meant to be? if not can you explain the idea behind leaving it one level up?

oops ;) Yes it was meant to be in the directory.

> 
> > 
> > there wouldnt be full versioning support (ie: via an atom) but you would
> > have the benefit of:
> > 
> > changelog
> > manifest
> > signing
> > metadata
> > much tidier
> 
> sounds really good to me
> the full versioning support could stil be done via a simple 'cp'
> you copy it to next version, and only the next ebuild that needs it 
> inherits it, all future ebuilds inherit it till you need to bump the 
> eclass again
> sound reasonable?

Exactly the idea.
Its versioned, but not really. Its a logical seperation where required.

> 
> (again guys, noone is saying, it is done like so, it is an idea, and one 
> i happen to like and would like to see incooperated into whatever the 
> solution will be)
> 
> > 
> > You could do a logical versioning system however.
> > In kernels case let me propose something like:
> > 
> > inherit kernel-${KV_MAJOR}.${KV_MINOR}
> > 
> > in which case we can have completely different code between the
> > eclasses.
> 
> if you tie the eclass version to the package version or not, either 
> choice would give you this flexibility, carry on work in an eclass 
> version that wont break any of the ebuilds still using the old eclass
> im sure people would find many uses once we could come up with a final 
> solution
> 
> > 
> > You will of course need to make sure these are unconditional in the
> > ebuild.
> > 

The actual code changes required here are minimal. When I spoke about it
last it had very good feedback. So I'll look at finding time and
definitely definitely write a GLEP for it this coming week.

-- 
Role:            Gentoo Linux Kernel Lead
Gentoo Linux:    http://www.gentoo.org
Public Key:      gpg --recv-keys 9C745515     
Key fingerprint: A0AF F3C8 D699 A05A EC5C  24F7 95AA 241D 9C74 5515
Web:
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9C745515

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to