From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1H3FQc-0000yj-Nb for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 17:33:59 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id l06HX2vB029870; Sat, 6 Jan 2007 17:33:02 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l06HUQlm005621 for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2007 17:30:27 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4145664ABD for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2007 17:30:24 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -1.081 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.081 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.136, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.5, TW_EV=0.077, TW_VB=0.077] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sNRlmSKbnH3z for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2007 17:30:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 785DF64AED for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2007 17:30:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1H3FMo-0006EC-0Z for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 18:30:02 +0100 Received: from 82.152.222.143 ([82.152.222.143]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 18:30:02 +0100 Received: from slong by 82.152.222.143 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 18:30:02 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Steve Long Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: metadatabase Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 17:30:25 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20061210011117.36672693@blashyrk> <200612171510.57159.jstubbs@gentoo.org> <20061217070429.126d8364@snowdrop> <200612171641.40343.jstubbs@gentoo.org> <20061217074812.497d4e78@snowdrop> <20061218084846.77600f69@snowdrop> <20061220102054.150d5f5a@snowdrop> <459557DF.8090106@gentoo.org> <45991157.3060508@gentoo.org> <4599EAAE.6030206@gentoo.org> <459CDACC.6080109@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.152.222.143 User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4 Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: dedd385e-7674-44b4-bc92-8bb4354ce3fd X-Archives-Hash: 1280ca9c407020a472e72cb893965f05 Ryan Hill wrote: > Robert Buchholz wrote: >> I don't want to sound negative and I like the idea a lot, but two things >> are on my mind about this: >> >> It should also sync with changes in the tree, like package removals, >> additions and package moves. > > For sure. > >> When you're talking about it on ebuild base: When a version bump is out, >> will it inherit the flags of the version before? > > I'd say no. The flags could easily change from version to version, even > from revbump to revbump. For example, a bump could introduce some kind > of QA violation not present in the previous ebuild or fail 'make test' > where the last version worked. Depends on what you're tracking I guess. > ++ to both, but I'm not an expert on ebuilds or the tree. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list