On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 04:20:04AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:56:23 -0700 > Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * easy to shoehorn in for any profile.bashrc compliant manager > > (portage/pkgcore); realize paludis is left out here (via it > > intentionally being left out of PMS atm by ciaran), but > > profile.bashrc *is* used by ebuild devs, thus it's a viable course (I > > don't see profile.bashrc ever going away basically). > > If profile.bashrc is to be kept, it means massively reducing what can > be done in there.
Restraint in use of profile.bashrc is a per community QA measure, not a format restriction- think through the other "this is better for QA" things I've suggested PMS wise, you've responded in the same manner. > > * doesn't address versioning changes. > > Or indeed any change where the ebuild can't be visible to older package > managers without breaking them. > > So basically it's not a solution at all. Name a scenario. Note, if the scenario is "pm doesn't support eapi function, and doesn't support profile.bashrc", skip it, you're repeating what I already laid out (which results in visible bash complaints, but the manager still labeling the eapi inoperable). ~harring
pgp7ybFpcdLqq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
