On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 18:34 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Friday 09 June 2006 16:35, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > This is the "official" (hehe) request for comments on making a policy of > > how to handle ebuilds than can be used for either client or server and > > how to allow for building client-only. > > rather than moving to some sort of policy that satisfies no one completely > and > we'll have to back out of later, why dont we wait until portage can give us > proper support for USE=client/server
Got an ETA? The situation we have now is confusing, at best, to our users, and something really should be done to resolve it. Waiting another 6 months to a year, only to be able to use it with the particular portage versions that support the proper EAPI for use-based dependencies is not an optimal answer for our users, which is why I came up with the proposal. Honestly, I don't care *what* is decided, so much as I want to spark conversation and see *some* resolution come of it that is *at least* consistent until use-based dependencies are a reality. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
