On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Jeroen Roovers <j...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 14:03:23 +0200 > Gilles Dartiguelongue <e...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> Since you are proposing this, a side question is: >> Why should we write SRC_URI in ebuilds if that info is now available >> in metadata.xml ? (granted that we might still want to keep >> over-riding this information in ebuilds) > > 1) The information in metadata.xml is inaccurate, it's a hint. When it > fails, nothing of value is lost since the ebuild (supposedly) has > what you want. > 2) SRC_URI is precise. > 3) SRC_URI can change over time, and across versions (even with all the > variables in place). > 4) Backward compatibility. > 5) The inversion of your question: Why should we start handling SRC_URI > outside ebuilds and eclasses? Or, how would that be practical, > advantageous, an improvement on the current situation.
Right, our proposal is not here to replace SRC_URI, it's here to fix the cases where SRC_URI can't be sanely used to guess new upstream versions (strange mangling rules, unbrowsable directories, etc...). -- Corentin Chary http://xf.iksaif.net
