On Wednesday 17 May 2006 18:39, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 17:39:02 +0200
>
> Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Wouldn't the introduction of the virtual not fix that. This
> > introduction could be done independent of anything related to
> > paludis. The introduction of such a virtual would also help other
> > package managers like pkgcore.
>
> That would address some of the immediate concerns, but not any longer
> term issues -- the default provider in all profiles would still be
> portage, which requires nasty hackery at system install time, for a
> start. I'd view changing the system dep to the virtual as a good thing
> in itself, but not a substitute for a profile in the tree.

The virtual is by default provided by the installed version. As it is 
necessary to install paludis to use it (even for system install) I don't 
think this is actually a problem. At the point where paludis is in a later 
stage of its development and acceptance, paludis specific profiles can be 
created. As I have argued before, I think that there are various enhancements 
that should be made to paludis before this can happen.

In short, I don't think that paludis is ready to become an official secondary 
package manager.

Personally I would only endorse a secondary package manager if I can go to 
install it on my current system and use it without fear of losing things. 
Even if I decide to discontinue using it. Having to remerge (automatically) 
some packages for it would be acceptable, but I believe that it can be 
avoided.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net