On Wednesday 17 May 2006 00:22, Stephen Bennett wrote: > > Does the Gentoo Project not support the > > entire tree all of a sudden? > > There are plenty of ebuilds in the tree marked as unsupported by > gentoo. Probably some profiles too, though I can't name them for > certain off the top of my head.
That's not an argument, the share of both unsupported and unmaintaned packages is problematic enough. Unfortunately trying to find a way to change this every time resulted in some devs starting a flame war. > 1) Is bugsy ready for this, with appropriate categories in place? > > Paludis-related bugs can be marked as invalid and the user directed to > Paludis' bug tracker on berlios.de. Alternatively, if our friendly > Bugzilla admins want to create categories I won't complain. I don't see > a need for it though. This costs someones time as well. I haven't had a look at Paludis (the name sucks as much as the name eselect had, before it was named eselect, btw.) yet, so I don't have an opinion on it, but if we (or some of us) start supporting arbitrary package managers, where do we end? Doesn't it cost time, that could be spent better!? If we do it, wouldn't it be better to modularize a bit first? E.g. defining interfaces between - tarball management (fetching via users tool of choice be it from the web or according to a file list from a named media (e.g. DVD or a tape), mirror handling etc.) - profile management (keeping the on disk representation apart from the way the dependency resolver gets the information) - package management (dependency resolver, ect.) - package installer (install files or create binary packages, may the target be .tbz2, .deb or .rpm) and implement them as independent tools, so we can easly exchange one for the other, if there is a superior one, instead having to throw everything away?! I don't think it would be beneficial in the long run, if the outcome would be that Gentoo divides into groups using different package managers. Carsten
pgpvhKXcZhDer.pgp
Description: PGP signature
