From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B6E01381F3 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:46:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B60CFE0956; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:46:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCEE4E07D2 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:46:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.27] (unknown [78.193.54.97]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: lu_zero) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B391A33E3BC for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:46:11 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <51BDA581.5070701@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 13:46:09 +0200 From: Luca Barbato User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130411 Thunderbird/17.0.5 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] SRC_URI behaviour References: <51BC2C55.7010506@mva.name> <20130615150549.5faa3829@gentoo.org> <51BD05A6.4090209@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <51BD05A6.4090209@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: e2a8dc8c-4517-4be4-b85d-11f371a0ebba X-Archives-Hash: 6413d58d2c16a44e8b36c92dc911624c On 06/16/2013 02:24 AM, Zac Medico wrote: > How about it we add a src_fetch phase, so that the VCS intricacies > can be delegated to ebuilds/eclasses (like they are now, but without > having to abuse src_unpack). If we include a way for src_fetch to > communicate changes in VCS revisions to the package manager, then > we'll be able to integrate functionality like smart-live-rebuild > directly into the package manager (as discussed in bug 182028 [1]). Sounds interesting. Still please notice that the initial and misdelivered point about live ebuild being NOT for everybody beside who develops software should be clear. lu