-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Enrico Weigelt wrote: > * Martin Rud Ehmsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: >> I don't see how this is going to make anything easier to maintain. > > Well, it's not the overlay, but the clean subtree'ing what does > the trick. If you look at the whole dependency graph, this subtree > is an really independent part, just if it was an big-fat package. > No one outside the subtree (or at least from the main tree) will > ever depend on it. That's the primary condition.
That has nothing to do with my statement that it does not make anything easier to maintain. Your statement is that it does, please prove that. (btw. with your definition of a substree you either end up with the whole tree or require to duplicate something). > In which cases do you have to look at KDE stuff ? As I said, in rare case. But trust me I have to do it from time to time. > Would you say, your part is actually an subtree (upon my definition) ? Probably not and I don't care. As soon as you have proved that your thing works and that it does make things easier, then I'll care. :-) > stuff, failed due out of space. Okay, I simply could cut off some > dirs (via rsync ignore option), but this implies quite some danger > that I miss something I need. And in that lies the problem with any approach that tries to cut things from the tree (you can cut leafs from the graph, but they clearly have nothing in common... in most cases). Martin R. Ehmsen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE44YHoCiIG96jYfYRAh+HAJ94npitjR8HzAsAamxotW/opzJkNwCglS/l 5NvEo3WI9Mu5VbnP/kQAdxU= =MMdI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- [email protected] mailing list
