On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 05:54:37PM -0700, Brock Pytlik wrote: > On 08/08/11 15:11, Shawn Walker wrote: > >On 08/08/11 14:30, Edward Pilatowicz wrote: > >>[snip] > >>fyi, i don't want the actual parsable output functionality in > >>ProgressTracker. i just wanted a variable indicating that we're > >>executing in parsable output mode in the ProgressTracker. basically, i > >>view the ProgressTracker as a class that allows the api client to tell > >>the api how it wants output to be managed and get detail notification of > >>events as that happens (and what it does with those events is up to it). > >>i put the verbose and quiet variable flags into the ProgressTracker > >>class because in the case of linked images we have to convey that > >>information onto subprocesses, this seemed a logical extension of that. > >>but really it's not that important. not bundling the two just means we > >>add an extra parameter to a bunch of code paths that already pass a > >>progresstracker pointer around. > >That makes sense, so I'll leave it between you two. > > > >-Shawn > I disagree that this is the right way forward, but since I need to > get this finished asap as it's blocking other people, I'm going to > try to do this tonight. Whether I can make it work or not, I'll send > out one more webrev tonight but unless I hear otherwise by noon > (pacific time) I'm landing this. >
sounds good. i'm fine with everything else. ed _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
