From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2904D139694 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2017 14:55:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 67228E0F00; Sun, 4 Jun 2017 14:55:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 176ADE0EF4 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2017 14:55:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from katipo2.lan (unknown [203.86.205.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kentnl) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8A1F534184B for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2017 14:55:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 02:54:24 +1200 From: Kent Fredric To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Addition of a new field to metadata.xml Message-ID: <20170605025424.102c5b69@katipo2.lan> In-Reply-To: <20170604125652.GA27391@dell-m4800> References: <20170602130903.334b0d03@katipo2.lan> <2816064.Ipx2b8F6kQ@note> <20170603023827.0d4531fa@katipo2.lan> <1496415085.16111.0.camel@gentoo.org> <20170603032221.35fd3fe4@katipo2.lan> <1496476708.10646.1.camel@gentoo.org> <20170603201932.6381c8ba@katipo2.lan> <20170604125652.GA27391@dell-m4800> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.15.0-dirty (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/p8SffcZnu02xBn4X4J.9Mme"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: d2af7d18-ad33-4e16-8850-1bfc1462abaa X-Archives-Hash: a750af9855edf5cbc64bc4d1bd6716f2 --Sig_/p8SffcZnu02xBn4X4J.9Mme Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 4 Jun 2017 13:56:52 +0100 Andrey Utkin wrote: > You have searched for packages that names contain libavcodec in > suite(s) stable, all sections, and all architectures. Found 4 > matching packages. Package libavcodec-dev > Package libavcodec-extra > Package libavcodec-extra-56 > Package libavcodec56 >=20 > Obviously numbered package name libavcodec56 can be an attribute of > exact ebuild, but not of a Gentoo package. Sure, but these sorts of things is why it wouldn't be mandatory to have any of these, and it wouldn't be mandatory to have a complete mapping. It would only be provisioned in as far as the maintainer of that package considered it useful, at their discretion. And even if you included several dozen, what are the downsides other than "ugly"? If the *utility* they provide outweighs the "ugly" factor, and there are no *technical* downsides of this "ugliness", then surely, the utility wins. An index that is incomplete here is still better than no index at all. --Sig_/p8SffcZnu02xBn4X4J.9Mme Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEPZazbI/qrFT1o9rn6FQySxNmqCAFAlk0H0cACgkQ6FQySxNm qCDXLw/+NFtPYpvg8UU5v9tr9FLRb5BV9Ifm69TwR0Acvq5dVSN88ylZMVrfGGG/ c4WKydhWUhZlAIJTDO71FMuoiZGMEGkGpoxNf2kspwlKZNbVWBCKM73UjhdmKDoM u6B8KNADoknB/6H+600LlU3xUHG0OS47fOgpjucrpb8369zp6JJyZsh50vnDQVnK TdhsX8bn320HJrKaAdX+EJzBy9BpvYDY43Q3uhhxjwcs4IZjfN4XoBDdoOT+wPrp 1hJVVMZVWE67IFxM5YyPSw0RQ6Qsi9NPi2yC0Bh2JEP7F3b5ydR01jMIW//Wzbuj m5IEuS7Hj+/JgR7v5+ygXtsEGKaedpgySexDiW5NDQjMFlBkAL/bc1OX6gwiZQOT llowO+kZcQcwDM+y9jmbmzcPHp1jIsDKycb5JxqPN0u/dtrpKxnOdeD8jW50+c8W 4H5wkqTgCXQy+N6AMHmAJfw4LdZSTvrYwRmH3M11J6ZXkEAASgQR/lmOVrazORu6 giNlnNL86HeOEZE8ySWbsJBl8mYPF7CweOqe9J2am2uBJsbDg2NdeQJSZjjdwoyL qJ0BOajFD5Yi1QUqTWCDiqHNIt2xMcrngfReAhMHTJESlt24cn9ZEpZWsmoh9I2C Wg4TZIppJshOH/PLLUQjBKgfYMLHFJ+iX9iHuOzLXGKyCz/nae0= =zWrW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/p8SffcZnu02xBn4X4J.9Mme--