On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 10:39:33AM +0100, Luca Barbato wrote: > John Mylchreest wrote: > >All comments or criticisms are more than welcome. > >Please let me know what your thoughts are. > looks interesting and not particulary painful to implement. Nope, pretty straightforward- the portage side of it is pretty minor.
Just need feedback from eclass devs that A) the switchover proposed would work for them, B) no naggles with the proposal, C) any *possible* additions. To head off the thread from starting anew, versioned eclasses aren't tabled for the spec. If someone wanted to do versioning themselves, the grouping allows them to do it, and not make a god awful mess for everyone else. Automatically pulling in the most 'recent' eclass version could be accomplished via inheritting indirectly- pulling in toolchain, which in turn just pulls in the most 'recent' toolchain version. Doesn't break the cache, provides a method (manual) of versionning w/in the existing eclass namespace, and doesn't force it on everyone else who thinks it's a daft idea. That is about all that there is to be said about versioning with this spec :) ~brian -- [email protected] mailing list
