On 11/18/2014 04:19 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote: > Jauhien Piatlicki <jauh...@gentoo.org> writes: > >> It would be probably good to have in the tree only the core components and >> move other stuff to the thematic overlays. >> >> Then we can have a clear understanding, how things should be: if >> something is a part of the core system, it goes to the tree, if >> something is a scientific packages, it lives in the science overlay, >> if something is a java stuff it lives in the java overlay, etc. > > This is a good idea. One difficulty: how to handle inter-overlay > dependence? Either the dependency should be expressed by overlay + > ebuild, or the dependent ebuild should be moved into the "core overlay". > I haven't figured out a clean solution yet. >
Yes, this is a weak point of decentralization. We should think how to solve it. The possible solution is using of dependencies between overlays (one overlay says, it depends on other). We already have such a feature, we only need to add more support for it. Example of such a dependency: %cat /var/lib/layman/melpa-stable/metadata/layout.conf repo-name = melpa-stable masters = gnu-elpa gentoo Dependencies on overlays in ebuilds is bad idea I think, as it only will introduce additional problems. Also think what if you need not a package, but an eclass or whatever else. In addition, one question that emerges is possible circular dependencies between overlays. We need a way to handle this. -- Jauhien
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
