From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-66461-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9155B13877A
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 18:35:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 74916E0A01;
Wed, 2 Jul 2014 18:35:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ve0-f176.google.com (mail-ve0-f176.google.com [209.85.128.176])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A7E6E09DF
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 18:35:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ve0-f176.google.com with SMTP id db12so11549581veb.7
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 11:35:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
:from:to:content-type;
bh=oHcP6JgN4L77ubCILCxl9AJWFq+FM2lalxeJonyDKdI=;
b=HCzTNBdCi32Sxca3RNs+aBq/HCbh+Pp6EpN9cNKfo6c291gQwtBdx0TZ3W+h5e5ARe
FTEN4pD5jClEnxJBIKqKHyAU9lypPXsR3Bl4klAtEMVdWNCBEZO9dX3+MAt6MqO5kHqh
i8GGxqO3ETxT519XtlUHznX2NLJmQiTHcgF+Id66RltvXxZF6a1WMvZyHa55nHEHyYeW
6V622jTwdOwAOQCADYRmMLYnLEtzv8xixixqzPrAzGQmlpogYw1Gu2rcmhZjeN+sjE/J
gE9RW1hQCEcF+/8ZdxmZm68jnweNveL9ndpcHr/33GBkuxpjJwlErq7IoX+OqrH7VmYK
+x4Q==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.221.63.195 with SMTP id xf3mr1684242vcb.36.1404326128623;
Wed, 02 Jul 2014 11:35:28 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.52.72.19 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 11:35:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <53B4504C.9050508@gentoo.org>
References: <20140702154416.GA1151@linux1>
<20140702195437.09c8efdb@pomiot.lan>
<CAGfcS_k3ODWqeUmB6vS8e+-sJEeqQ==SO2pxTb99=zphhtq28A@mail.gmail.com>
<53B4504C.9050508@gentoo.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 14:35:28 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: yBjM6QIugTDHs_Xy9risuZoK1tA
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_=MfwQx800tVTkd6ikCgMX3brs7Qp5F7Ro9-Ra0Mr_yJA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] new profile layout with flavors and mix-ins
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: e0496930-a375-465c-8b35-6f703ccca3e1
X-Archives-Hash: 610ea0b9ace3217bed5c03efd590025e
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Anthony G. Basile <blueness@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Shallow profiles avoid this. Also "features" avoid this (the
> closest thing we have to mix-ins) provided they operate on a set of
> flags/packages orthogonal to the rest of the stack. You then have shallow
> base and you can add as many features as you like in, in any order,
> confident that one will not clobber stuff from another since each feature is
> well separated.
That was my thinking as well. If we had categories of profiles and
set up the rules to try to keep things orthogonal then we're going to
be better off. Also, things like feature profiles should try to be
additive in nature.
Rich