-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 08 Feb 2009 14:43:01 -0800 > Zac Medico <zmed...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> Well, if you want to use timestamps, the alternative is to >> distributors to use a protocol which preserves timestamps. This >> creates an unnecessary burden. Allowing distribution of metadata >> cache via version control systems is more flexible. > > Ok, if we're going to encourage this, let's do it properly: > > * Have a branch called 'master'. Commit to it. Don't stick any metadata > in it. > > * Have a branch called 'master-with-metadata'. Don't commit to it > manually. > > * Have a script that merges master to master-with-metadata, and as part > of the merge commit, generates all necessary metadata for the range > it's merging.
Yes, that's how I imagine it should be done. > * Store either the partial hash or the owning repository and timestamp > of each eclass used by an ebuild in its metadata. I think the partial hash is plenty of information since the package manager still needs some other way to resolve the eclass paths in order to generate the cache in the first place. - -- Thanks, Zac -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkmQi+oACgkQ/ejvha5XGaNrkACg2l+CndFMKHPEx3vtw0FhohRz i5MAnA/usLTUHsSD5y0QZx8tY91sfdau =ya5w -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
