On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:15:56 -0700 Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marius Mauch wrote: > > Ok, as there is currently a lot of work going on for GLEP 23 > > (licese based visibility filtering aka ACCEPT_LICENSE) the topic of > > license groups came up, in particular the way how they should be > > (technically) defined. > > > > The simplest way is a line based format > > <groupname> <license1> ... <licenseN> > > however this doesn't allow for any addition of metadata (for example > > descriptions to explain the purpose of a group), these (if wanted) > > would have to be defined in another file. The alternative would be > > to use a more complex file format, for example so called ini-style > > > > [groupname] > > licenses=license1 license2 ... licenseN > > description=Sample license group > > constains_stupid_licenses=1 > > Some way to express metadata makes sense, but ini-style doesn't fit in > with any existing configuration format portage (in the broader sense, > not the sys-apps/portage sense) uses (make.conf, metadata.xml, etc) -- > does it? Well, there have been long-term plans to introduce it into portage (for example to replace the make.conf parser which suffers from a few limitations or to make $FEATURES more flexible), but just plans so far. Thing is that most formats we currently have are one-dimensional (a=b) while for this (groups with metadata) we would need something two-dimensional (a[b]=c). Mind that I mentioned the ini-style format just as an example (it has the benefit that we'd get the parser for free), we're completely open to alternatives. Marius -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
