Ryan Hill wrote: > Steve Long wrote: >> Robert Buchholz wrote: >>> Since the tree itself is the best database of the packages available, >>> anything else would be a lot more overhead. > >> I really don't agree, altho I could well be missing something. Surely there >> should be a maintenance/QA database which tracks the tree and where you >> could put information like this (ie a boolean flag for this instance) which >> simply shouldn't be exposed to users. There's no need for it, it doesn't >> effect them, and why should it go in the ebuilds where a maintainer might >> delete it? > > I just use a local db to keep track of stuff like this, but haven't > thought of a way to turn this into a service and i don't think it's > really doable. I think you'd need an entry for every ebuild in portage, > times the number of archs, times an unlimited number of arbitrary fields > (one for each thing you're tracking). Something like, say, checking > every package in the tree for GPL-2 or GPL-2+ licenses doesn't need the > separate arch entries of course, but stuff like GCC testing definitely does. > > Even if you did manage to set this up, I wouldn't want to maintain it.
I don't want to sound negative and I like the idea a lot, but two things are on my mind about this: It should also sync with changes in the tree, like package removals, additions and package moves. When you're talking about it on ebuild base: When a version bump is out, will it inherit the flags of the version before? Regards, Robert -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
