On 23/01/2017 13:12, Alexis Ballier wrote: > For example, if you allow use.mask or use.force in mixins, you can end > up having unsatisfiable deps that repoman will never catch.
Whoa, that sounds bad. Could you elaborate why we wouldn't be able to catch these errors? > Arguably, desktop profiles relying on having an useflag forced on a > given package are already semi-broken: they'd be better with the > useflag default enabled and proper usedeps, so the mask/force game > doesnt seem really useful for mixins. Could you give examples of such assumptions? I'd agree in general usedeps sound like the proper solution. > It'd also be great to have "rules" ensuring all mixins commute, but I > doubt that's easily doable. Could you elaborate more on that, and what the difficulties are? Michał: also consider including in the GLEP how eselect profile would look like and behave. Paweł
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
