On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 20:56:35 +0900
Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:31, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > Right now 'emerge action' and 'emerge --action' are both supported.
> > But as we learned with the rsync case 'emerge action' has potential
> > namespace conflicts with 'emerge package' I'd propose to deprecate
> > 'emerge action' before we hit another real conflict.
> > (The alternative would be to deprecate 'emerge package' in favor of
> > a to-be-written 'emerge install <package>', but that's even more
> > problematic)
> > Technically it's a no-brainer, only potential problem would be user
> > confusion.
> > Any objections against this for pre5?
> 
> If by "deprecate" you mean to detect when '--' hasn't been prepended
> and either go ahead with the action or notify that the package
> doesn't exist then I have no objections. Might be better to go with
> the latter so that users adjust quickly.

You saw the attached one-line patch?
Atm it just throws a warning when an action without -- is used.
I'm divided on ignoring the action then, on one hand it would be nice to
get rid of this, OTOH it would be kinda rude to not have a transition
period for people. Anyone else having an opinion on this?

Marius

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to