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 1LWX0A-0005ym-3b for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2009 14:20:46 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 378E1E0395; Mon, 9 Feb 2009 14:20:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ext.lri.fr (ext.lri.fr [129.175.15.4]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DB63E0395 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2009 14:20:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ext.lri.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31ED5A43B4 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2009 15:20:43 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at lri.fr Received: from ext.lri.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ext.lri.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ofbyvysz2eX6 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2009 15:20:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.lri.fr (vhost3-23 [129.175.3.23]) by ext.lri.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A8D1A43B1 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2009 15:20:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from [129.175.11.52] (lri11-52 [129.175.11.52]) by smtp.lri.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 154A2E056A for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2009 15:20:43 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <49903BFD.7090508@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 15:21:49 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?UsOpbWkgQ2FyZG9uYQ==?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) 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] DIGESTS metadata variable for cache validation References: <498758E6.5080609@gentoo.org> <1234045916.24784.1373.camel@localhost> <498E17E6.8060407@gentoo.org> <20090208221814.722f573a@snowmobile> <498F5FF5.50203@gentoo.org> <20090208224721.4193ca45@snowmobile> <498F64D4.4080303@gentoo.org> <20090208231010.4b2ebe3b@snowmobile> <498F6A7A.2060408@gentoo.org> <20090208233008.6350dd40@snowmobile> <498F6D60.7080500@gentoo.org> <49902202.1080607@gentoo.org> <20090209135922.796d6256@snowcone> <49903A9B.5020601@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <49903A9B.5020601@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: a3d2e169-bd6c-480d-a11b-9b1f6fbdd3d0 X-Archives-Hash: 0f3c2d2c2aff10d21bf04d019f18fd9c Petteri R=C3=A4ty a =C3=A9crit : > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 14:30:58 +0200 >> Petteri R=C3=A4ty wrote: >>> It would probably be useful to provide a central rsync infra for >>> overlays where overlay maintainers could subscribe their overlays to >>> and the machine would pull in their VCS and generate the metadata for >>> them. >> How much do you trust overlay maintainers? >> >=20 > It shouldn't be that hard to sandbox the overlays for cache generation. > Trust should be much more of an issue to people actually installing > stuff from overlays. Adding new overlays to the server would probably > have to be manual. I can't possibly be the *only* one to think that the ideas in this=20 thread are getting out of hand as far as complexity is concerned. Seriously, let's try to do simpler things that most developers can=20 understand. Cheers, R=C3=A9mi