[email protected] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 02:51:56PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
Are there any objections to me removing any rename code as part of my
catalog work, with the belief that it will be implemented substantially
different than it is (only partially implemented) today?
That's actually not true. It was fully implemented when I put it
back. It's just that we've permitted others to introduce code that is
incompatible with rename, and now as a result of bit-rot and poor
maintenance, don't have something that works correctly.
I would expect Stephen to have the final word on any such proposal.
I don't if it has ever has been complete, I just know it isn't at this time.
I also believe there have been discussions about different approaches to
re-implementing rename in a way that will be more conducive to the SAT
solver work currently in progress (which obviously couldn't have been
accounted for when rename was first implemented).
I've also been asked in the past to not document the existing rename was
there wasn't agreement on what the long-term approach should be.
The proposal for the new catalog format doesn't currently include or
account for our current rename implementation, so that would cause
further divergence from the partial implementation that is currently in
place.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
