From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-15301-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@gentoo.org>) id 1G6caz-0002kv-2H for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 29 Jul 2006 00:22:21 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k6T0LSW6016606; Sat, 29 Jul 2006 00:21:28 GMT Received: from aaar.vm.bytemark.co.uk (aaar.vm.bytemark.co.uk [80.68.92.230]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6T0JWvN025355 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 29 Jul 2006 00:19:32 GMT Received: from qoo.home (bb-87-81-240-59.ukonline.co.uk [87.81.240.59]) (using SSLv3 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aaar.vm.bytemark.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54A882A37A for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 29 Jul 2006 01:19:30 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] proxy-dev (an alternative to sunrise?) From: Alastair Tse <liquidx@gentoo.org> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <44CA5CC2.5000404@gentoo.org> References: <44C97422.3040608@gentoo.org> <Mahogany-0.66.0-12594-20060728-200243.00@kihnet.sk> <44CA5CC2.5000404@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 01:19:29 +0100 Message-Id: <1154132369.13615.22.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 34e02ea4-4021-4d37-86d4-9e2b15185708 X-Archives-Hash: 79d6e5b810f95bbfda7c54d82941d726 On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 11:51 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Robert Cernansky wrote: > > If I have some application that is not included in portage why > > I decide to make an ebuild? Because I hope that then it will be > > accepted and included to portage, so maintained by developers (big > > thanks for this). If I have to take care of package + ebuild + > > dependencies, I'll rather choose not to make an ebulid but compile > > package right from .tar.gz archive. > > Many people disagree with you here, that's why overlays exist. Somebody > wants to use Portage to manage ebuilds that aren't yet in the actual tree. > I have to say I agree with Donnie here on this. I've been using private ebuilds for certain things that are installed on my work systems that will never be applicable to anyone except for 4 people on this planet. Yet I use these because then I'm able to take this simple single file, plonk it into another Gentoo machine and recreate the same installation. Maybe it is just because making ebuilds is now just second nature to me. Look at my overlay at the moment, half the stuff there have a less than 30% chance of ever making it into the main portage tree. But I still make those ebuilds in the off chance that either (a) I do decide to put them in, or (b) someone else might stumble across them and find it, and (c) there are just things that I cannot test because I don't have the hardware. Proxy-dev and sunrise are completely different things. But both are trying to decrease the steps needed to contribute to open source, so in my book, that is a good thing. Cheers, Alastair -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list