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 461B813877A for ; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 21:54:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A0027E0AC0; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 21:54:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vc0-f181.google.com (mail-vc0-f181.google.com [209.85.220.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2512E08AC for ; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 21:54:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vc0-f181.google.com with SMTP id lf12so10101632vcb.26 for ; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:54:45 -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=/m5nhpxYk+l/aGnri3SLp1j4+0OgNqPWkqRj5oDrEWo=; b=E4sj766tSPx7t0/DOZgY5EbIat9f/lJ+pC8PI6wlS1MGgQSY1BYImVZfd58cuVroAM HpJF1tBKa+/BTzyYLOXendyezn230lhY3AWPpggNFnr24jC8i3rIIPDALGheIeYsJ5z3 S7niweIfkVNeKIF1a2ltD9Q68WrmPH7664DzfIJX0RRMMvqfPe2AgQvpkNe+lyshPIF+ kyzrkawYvco8vzoTZsKiVfT90Ow4U7VKnwcJVKqjg5Ox4mduBjSfw2HwY1fK8GUtDVB+ 5U8XNoXHwlhQZ2AdurS2D6WU8gwmKEPoP99/nG1V1Narm535VhjC93Ef6PJXiqPe8nSG pKxg== 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 X-Received: by 10.52.186.199 with SMTP id fm7mr32233606vdc.15.1406498085782; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:54:45 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.8.229 with HTTP; Sun, 27 Jul 2014 14:54:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <53CD6BED.10603@gentoo.org> <53CD8BBA.2010605@gentoo.org> <53D5072E.3030305@gentoo.org> <20140727222429.3febdefa@pomiot.lan> <20140727205113.9578.qmail@stuge.se> <20140727215642.3bbd0826@googlemail.com> Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 17:54:45 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: RuFqpqT_srDXC0KaeWaTdcV4AFI Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] don't rely on dynamic deps From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 6ded292c-cf16-4d64-b2dd-dead2d643b21 X-Archives-Hash: cbd0e2deaf19a175839776505501310c On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Kent Fredric wrote: > > On 28 July 2014 09:34, Rich Freeman wrote: >> >> and if it doesn't work for them, >> they'll sync in the updates one way or another (using an overlay if >> necessary). > > > However, in the case the package gets removed from tree, an updates based > approach would allow the dependencies to be cleaned up long after the > package itself is gone. Maybe, but is it really our goal to fix broken packages that aren't even maintained any longer? The latest version of the package will always be in cvs/etc and users can always go fetch it, but do we need a special updates mechanism simply for the purpose of fixing packages that we've already decided are unsustainable? If an updates-like approach is the best approach for active packages, then I'd consider the side-benefit to treecleaned ones as being beneficial. However, I wouldn't really view this as a primary concern. At least, that is my sense of it right now. The primary focus needs to be on making dynamic deps work in a sensible way for active packages, which we're apparently having problems with already. Rich