Re: [gentoo-dev] glep 0042 (news) final draft

[Marius Mauch <genone@gentoo.org>]

On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 00:19:47 +0000
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Attached is the final draft. No substantial changes since last time,
> just wording cleanups and a few clarifications. You'll be able to see
> it here in an hour or three (check the dates!):
> 
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0042.html
> 
> Or you can try to read the attached RST source, but no moaning that it
> looks weird if you do.
> 
> Unless there are any huge flaws found, I'd like this to be voted on by
> the council -- looks like it'll have to wait until April's meeting to
> fit in with the two weeks rule.

Nothing major, just a few minor issues (I'll admit I'm late):
"* Portage must extend portageq to implement a command which
returns whether or not the profile used for a given repository ID
matches a certain base path (e.g. portageq profile_used
default-linux/sparc/sparc64/2004.3 gentoo-x86)."
Wording here is a bit unclear, I assume it's supposed to mean wether or
not the (any) used profile belongs the the given repoid and is (a
subprofile of) the given profile name. Using "path" here is dangerous,
e.g. portageq profile_used base gentoo-x86.

As any substantial change results in a new news item should there be an
optional "Obsoletes" header? Could be used to make sure people only see
the most current version (without relying on rsync to wipe deleted
files).

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.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list