From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JRGy8-0006E4-TP for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:08:25 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 00F3CE07F0; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:08:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp03.tky.fi (smtp03.tky.fi [82.130.63.73]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A8970E07F0 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:08:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.130.46.223] ([82.130.46.223]) by smtp03.tky.fi (SMSSMTP 4.1.9.35) with SMTP id M2008021903082029241 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 03:08:20 +0200 Message-ID: <47BA2BFF.2060802@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 03:08:15 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0dGVyaSBSw6R0eQ==?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071124) 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Deprecating an eclass References: <47B60FA5.8010807@gentoo.org> <47B9EE0C.10707@gentoo.org> <20080218204951.337fe426@snowcone> <47BA048B.1020602@gentoo.org> <20080218222550.2c3dcbea@snowcone> In-Reply-To: <20080218222550.2c3dcbea@snowcone> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 OpenPGP: url=http://users.tkk.fi/~praty/public.asc Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig7408CA3E720BCC6E06B826F6" X-Archives-Salt: 98c41915-6db1-4fa0-966b-fe1ae525b79b X-Archives-Hash: 826c25ca2ca7902c3ff1ceadbff35522 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig7408CA3E720BCC6E06B826F6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti: > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:19:55 -0500 > Doug Klima wrote: >>> Well, that depends upon whether you want it to be part of the C/P-V >>> metadata... If you do, it's a cache format change (and you can't >>> easily do DEPRECATED_*). But then, deprecation is a property of the >>> eclass, not an C/P-V. >> Deprecation is a property of the eclass. Not of an ebuild. The point >> is to allow utilities and users/developers to clearly see that an >> eclass is deprecated and what they should be using in place of it. >=20 > Right. eclasses don't currently have metadata (and there's no easy way > for them to have it, since eclasses can't be sourced standalone). If > you make deprecation a metadata variable, there will be no way for a > package manager to determine whether an eclass is deprecated unless it > has an ebuild that uses that eclass. Is this a satisfactory restriction= ? >=20 A metadata.xml like file for eclasses could fit the bill. It could have=20 both the maintainer info and the deprecation information among other=20 things. Regards, Petteri --------------enig7408CA3E720BCC6E06B826F6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHuiwCcxLzpIGCsLQRAnscAJ49R+LQ/Ue7x9J05Np3vzD0vJ8AfQCgmdwO mEF4MaQA6zi+Ie/yE0/Cm5c= =5hdE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig7408CA3E720BCC6E06B826F6-- -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list