Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles

[Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@blueyonder.co.uk>]

On Wed, 17 May 2006 16:21:13 +0200 Carsten Lohrke <carlo@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| > Nice idea in theory. In reality, Portage is a big incestuous mess
| > and can't have that kind of change made to it
| 
| The former yes, the latter statement is questionable.

Not really. It's why everyone is busy rewriting Portage. The code
simply isn't modular enough to make ripping out any particular
component viable.

| > , and defining such an 
| > interface between package manager parts would take considerably more
| > time and code than just rewriting the whole thing.
| 
| That won't mean you face the same situation at one point again, so
| you likely have to spent the same or even more amount of time, just
| over a longer time frame.

And no matter how many times people end up rewriting things, doing a
generic future-proof cross-language interface that supports everything
that *might* be done in the future is going to take so long that it
will never actually get written.

| > Having said that, 
| > you can swap around pretty much any component of Paludis, since it's
| > proper modular code -- Kugelfang has a mostly working
| > implementation of a CRAN repository, for example.
| 
| Doesn't sound like independent runtime components, as I am proposing.

It's compile time at present, simply because no-one considers it worth
the effort of screwing around with .so files until it's really really
necessary.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list