From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3543 invoked by uid 1002); 5 Sep 2003 08:15:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 3904 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2003 08:15:04 -0000 From: Philippe =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lafoucri=E8re?= Reply-To: lafou@wanadoo.fr To: Thomas de Grenier de Latour Cc: Gentoo-dev In-Reply-To: <20030904221405.6f2b9f22.degrenier@easyconnect.fr> References: <200309041251.49718.vapier@gentoo.org> <20030904175911.GA1161@breccia.escarpment> <20030904200705.72bb2b53.cam@cameuh.net> <200309041502.33601.vapier@gentoo.org> <20030904214530.1d18c60d.cam@cameuh.net> <20030904221405.6f2b9f22.degrenier@easyconnect.fr> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: InFuzzion Message-Id: <1062749703.2935.1.camel@biproc> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.3 Date: 05 Sep 2003 10:15:03 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Breaking up the beast known as app-games X-Archives-Salt: cba8b81d-f66e-4047-aece-c21db4fe822a X-Archives-Hash: 34c3dad8851c26918d682d983ec3e51c > I don't see the main difficulty in modifying portage, but rather in > doing the transition to the new tree without breaking backward > compatibility with old installed portage versions. There are some > people, especialy those who run gentoo on production servers, who don't > do their weekly deep update :/ I'm the one who proposed the 2 levels a long time ago for zope & apache stuff. I don't see the problem with backward compatibility ?? You won't have the new tree until a sync or rsync. there, a message will warn you (as every time) to update portage. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list