[gentoo-dev] Lastrites: app-misc/gramps-3.4.9

2016-11-11 Thread Kevin Simmons
# Kevin Simmons (11 Nov 2016) # Is holding up removal of old versions of # sci-geosciences/osm-gps-map. # Removal in 30 days. app-misc/gramps-3.4.9

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New version constraints: variant one

2016-11-11 Thread Kent Fredric
On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 23:53:40 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: > dev-foo/bar[>=3][foo]# version + USE I kinda find this asking for problems with visual ambiguity. Use different grouping symbols or supercede the USE syntax entirely. dev-foo/bar[foo]#(>=3) Or something. I'm also suggesting

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] New version constraints: variant one

2016-11-11 Thread Michał Górny
On Fri, 11 Nov 2016 11:31:17 +0100 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > So, here is a counter proposal, following the KISS principle as much > as possible: > > 1. Existing dependency syntax will be allowed indefinitely. As long as I'm not forced to use that crap, I'm fine with it. > 2. Version restrictions

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] New version constraints: variant one

2016-11-11 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Michał Górny wrote: > ==, !=, <=, >= -- all consistent with one another. Same for ===, > !==, <==, >==. Using some old ~ and = wouldn't fit that. The gain is > greater than any benefit keeping old operator in a completely new > syntax. The gain is close to zero, if not

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] New version constraints: variant one

2016-11-11 Thread Michał Górny
On Fri, 11 Nov 2016 09:25:30 +0100 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Michał Górny wrote: > > > Most of your comments don't make sense if you are commenting on the > > actual proposal. However, it seems that you immediately ignored the > > core part of the proposal, and then co

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] New version constraints: variant one

2016-11-11 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Michał Górny wrote: > Most of your comments don't make sense if you are commenting on the > actual proposal. However, it seems that you immediately ignored the > core part of the proposal, and then commented on stupidity of some > distorted, imagined, half-ass proposal y