-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Robert Buchholz wrote: > How is using the eclass better for bandwidth usage? It won't allow for > mirroring, and all users would have to checkout the repository from one > place. Furthermore, you cannot have (signed) Manifests that allow > integrity checks.
- From what I understand of the idea, the eclass will just change the SRC_URI field from the first case (sf=tgz) to the second case (->). Eclasses have to be sourced before the SRC_URI is determined because they can already add (and presumably alter) elements of the SRC_URI variable. So I'm not sure how this would directly affect mirroring or manifests any more than simply using the -> notation? Could you explain what you mean when you say it won't allow for mirroring? Generating different tarballs is much more of an issue, and would impact on manifests too. I guess it's a try-it-and-see situation... Either way, it seems like the eclass idea would be a good compromise for those that don't want gitweb specific workarounds in the package manager, but would like to allow the flexibility for people who do? Mike 5:) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjBJlYACgkQu7rWomwgFXowcACgt8wHN3OwRN9B19WHXVdn23BV xvYAn1URdx9VR3z3wFiRG3RqMTlAxaOC =crVS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
