From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M8HNQ-0006Ih-9a for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 24 May 2009 17:20:49 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C8FD5E04D8; Sun, 24 May 2009 17:20:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.171]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D5B1E04D8 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 17:20:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 28so1020315wfc.10 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 10:20:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=l6WLnxw9PyS2h5OB+HLdqtuTVCsZFkg2QI4UZVnbtF0=; b=C8+kanezKV02XIY9jezLRFfKmOuSxw32qn2HNuu4nt5HVsX5MCFBqKSiiGQtAn3KNk EHOgo7XgX1FLmmKL2eUwwavK8MUvFLJyYJBzUoPcIM8QGVW/v3F5ba88UzP48i32O9cj fNit019rPwrPabh9YX/PckofzFSj7RyDeMSn8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=qg/bQ0KI2j/9I7teI3mutK06I51f5LoVNFOo+rCZD1u3GmRxkygZ1dFlWxkPOdv7Ae fJHjarJMdg+mBQhia/XJiabZ/mdKDHS10fhtuvPRYetzzar2REfh59bUeNIyfnyH6yVm hEkWPmQfE9Qec1mvywcmvkp/tK0eQnAvGgaSc= 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 Sender: nirbheek.chauhan@gmail.com Received: by 10.110.26.8 with SMTP id 8mr188277tiz.46.1243185645337; Sun, 24 May 2009 10:20:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 22:50:45 +0530 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 89eda09d19c15fea Message-ID: <8b4c83ad0905241020nd12a907ieccb43346cabc147@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC:sys-apps/portage @overlay atoms postfix support From: Nirbheek Chauhan To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: acca8345-545f-4a41-bd09-7cf47ef7d74f X-Archives-Hash: a74d8410ce5b588b9f714f4eaff1bd3a On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 10:34 PM, wrote: > Adding "@overlay" atoms/deps postfix support could really make life > easier, especially because forcing specific atoms in *DEPEND hoping > that these will be always pulled in from the same overlay is not > something reliable, as you already know. > > Examples: > > app-foo/foo@overlay > app-foo/foo:2@overlay > foo:2@overlay > foo@overlay > > Comments are welcome, flames are not. Won't this just lead to dependency hell? With horrible dependencies between different overlays? The current system of "overlays" being restrictive is (IMO) beneficial in the long-term because it forces people to move stuff to the main tree instead of going the lazy way and putting inter-overlay dependencies. If the concept of "overlay" is taken as "feature overlays", then dependencies should not go beyond the main tree + the overlay itself. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan