Re: [gentoo-dev] December 15th Meeting Summary

[Marius Mauch <genone@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1193 bytes --]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 13:45:04 -0500
solar <solar@gentoo.org> wrote:

> If you do that please set it as a blocker for the .54 release. 
> Reintroducing ChangeLog/metadata.xml to Manifests would be a undesired
> regression. Nothing in the portage as of <=.53 make direct use of
> those two files and there is no security value in bloating the digest
> format with them. Thats why they were removed 2.0.51.21
> 
> Making the argument for maybe portage in the future will use them is 
> not valid as they are currently omited and we/I have been told before
> by the portage team (ferringb & jstubbs iirc??) that portage itself
> wont be doing any .xml parsing in it's core. IE So that means not
> today nor tomorrow will anything need to depend on those files in
> order to build.

Name a single portage version that does *not generate* manifest entries
for them (hint: there is none). They are only ignored right now during
verification. So it's in no way a regression.

Marius

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]