On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:18:46 +0200
Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh schrieb:
> > On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:44:52 +0200
> > "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Perhaps we should just move DESCRIPTIONs to metadata. That would
> >> make it impossible to use ${PV} and more importantly also remove
> >> some duplication.
> >
> > Got to be careful here. In the past it's been stated that Portage
> > won't use XML for anything that it has to parse.
>
> Well, if/when DESCRIPTION is moved to metadata, this must be changed.The intention was to stick with things that could be parsed quickly and easily, without relying upon slow library code. Whether that's still an issue these days what with the Portage people who were saying that the loudest not being around any more is up for debate... Although, at the other end of the scale, Daniel claims that he wanted to move all ebuild metadata into metadata.xml... > Unless we change the metadata format as well (to yaml for example :-) The only specification-compliant yaml parser is written in C, has only the bottom two layers of the stack and no usable external bindings... Perhaps you mean "something that's basically yaml except with reserved string-start characters not handled correctly", in which case there's Syck... -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
