* Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy
@ 2014-01-17 18:28 99% ` Ciaran McCreesh
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Ciaran McCreesh @ 2014-01-17 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 917 bytes --]
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 17:47:58 +0100
Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Maybe we can let the package managers only perceive it as keyworded or
> stable if all of its dependencies are keyworded or stable on the
> architecture that the user runs. Then we can have repoman just ignore
> checking dependencies' keywords when we keyword or stabilize them.
>
> Not sure how implementable this idea is though...
It's going to hurt for four reasons that I can think of right now.
Firstly, things you think are "obviously portable" sometimes aren't.
Secondly, users already get confused by "stable use masks". This is
going to be even worse: users aren't going to understand why a noarch
package isn't available for them.
Thirdly, you have to decide how to deal with long chains and cycles in
noarch dependencies.
Fourthly, the interaction with || deps is an awful mess.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2014-01-14 21:37 [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy William Hubbs
2014-01-15 11:30 ` Sergey Popov
2014-01-15 15:30 ` William Hubbs
2014-01-16 6:17 ` Sergey Popov
2014-01-17 6:06 ` grozin
2014-01-17 7:02 ` grozin
2014-01-17 15:31 ` Ulrich Mueller
2014-01-17 16:47 ` Tom Wijsman
2014-01-17 18:28 99% ` Ciaran McCreesh
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox