On 22/11/2007, Lukas Oboril <oboril.lukas at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Nov 21, 2007 3:46 PM, Lukas Oboril <oboril.lukas at gmail.com> wrote: > > > Thanks for doing this Lukas, I will try this later today. > > > > > > I do have two comments: > > > > > > 1) Could we create a KBE directory under SPECS and move the spec files > > > there so that we can separate different types of spec files out. I'm > > > certain before its over that we may need to support other spec file > > > formats. > > > > Hmm, I'll think about it. > > > > > I consider the KBE for just "build environments" ... nothing more. > This is the reason why I would not to merge with SPECS directory. Yes, > it's possible merge directory KBE a SPECS, but I don't see real > benefit for this merge.
It isn't a merge. It is merely a directory underneath the SPECS repository. You can call it pkgbuild instead, but the main point I was getting at is that the spec files you have in there are specific to a particular build system. I was in no way suggesting that you place KBE material into the SPECS directory or that you merge the SPECS repository with the current KBE repository. > Conclusion from my point of view: I do not prefer merge KBE with > SPECS directory, but this is not one way road. That wasn't what I was intending by my request. I was merely suggesting a particular directory structure to indicate the *type* of spec files contained within. In other words, we may want to keep other types of spec files in our repository for other build systems and having them separated using directory structure for organisations purposes is good. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall
