From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Opinions Wanted - Arrays again :)
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:57:25 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <pan.2007.10.26.18.57.25@cox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 1193418183.3487.3.camel@uberpc.marples.name
Roy Marples <uberlord@gentoo.org> posted
1193418183.3487.3.camel@uberpc.marples.name, excerpted below, on Fri, 26
Oct 2007 18:03:03 +0100:
> Fair enough, but one of the goals of baselayout-2 is to support
> baselayout-1 configs where possible if the shell is still bash.
>
> I'm striving to support similar configs for non bash shells so that
> there's not much of a learning curve.
>
> Yes we could have a totally new non compatible setup, but that would
> really suck hard for upgraders yes?
Unless I misunderstood something, and as certainly the example you gave
showed, backward compatibility would be pretty simple: just throw the
entire array in the eth0_extra_options= line or whatever.
Besides, the idea is that the vars should be almost self-documenting for
at least the "simple" setups, so while there'd certainly be a conversion
necessary, for those "simple" setups, it should be as easy to explain
that as it will be/is to explain the rules for converting to arrays and
have them get it right (said as one who has done the conversion to the
present baselayout-2 format and screwed up something dumb in the
process). Converting the somewhat "magic" array from one form to
another, due to that "magic", is going to be more error prone than
converting to vars of the type Gentoo users already use every day, each
with a single defined purpose, no fancy format necessary. That's for the
"simple" setups. The more complex setups by definition should have folks
that understand those setups well enough to do the conversion without
major issue, since they pretty much had to in ordered to create them in
the first place.
So after implementing individual vars, there should be two viable options
for upgrading users. (1) Simply stick the array in the _extra_options
vars with only minimal (if any) format changes, or break it up into the
individual values. Presumably the individual values would be recommended
as the supported choice going forward, but the shove-it-all-in-the-
options option would be there as well, for those who didn't want to
bother with more at that moment.
Of course, that's still assuming the folks actually doing the baselayout2
work (you, and I'm not sure how many others working with you) ultimately
decide that it's worth the trouble to change. I do honestly believe from
a user perspective it'll be easier to maintain and thus more trouble-free
if an individual values setup is ultimately chosen, but it's certainly
more work to setup from an implementation perspectiv, and very pointedly,
I'm not the one doing that work, so it's very easy for me to sit here and
get all fancy about how it "should" be done. =8^) IOW, it's very much
your call. You just asked for opinions and I'm happily giving mine. =8^)
Of course, as I'm already on baselayout2, I'll be bug testing whatever is
ultimately decided. =8^)
--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-26 19:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-25 15:40 [gentoo-dev] Opinions Wanted - Arrays again :) Roy Marples
2007-10-25 16:02 ` Marijn Schouten (hkBst)
2007-10-25 16:18 ` Roy Marples
2007-10-25 16:37 ` Ioannis Aslanidis
2007-10-26 11:30 ` Roy Marples
2007-10-25 17:18 ` Josh Saddler
2007-10-25 21:31 ` Donnie Berkholz
2007-10-25 21:49 ` Roy Marples
2007-10-25 22:56 ` Donnie Berkholz
2007-10-26 6:28 ` Roy Marples
2007-10-26 10:16 ` Richard Freeman
2007-10-26 10:42 ` Roy Marples
2007-10-26 16:36 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2007-10-26 17:03 ` Roy Marples
2007-10-26 18:57 ` Duncan [this message]
2007-10-26 21:17 ` Roy Marples
2007-10-27 3:02 ` Richard Freeman
2007-10-28 6:46 ` [gentoo-dev] " Steve Long
2007-10-29 7:35 ` Natanael Copa
2007-10-30 3:55 ` [gentoo-dev] " Steve Long
2007-10-26 6:13 ` [gentoo-dev] " Alec Warner
2007-10-26 6:32 ` Roy Marples
2007-10-29 9:50 ` Roy Marples
2007-10-30 3:58 ` [gentoo-dev] " Steve Long
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=pan.2007.10.26.18.57.25@cox.net \
--to=1i5t5.duncan@cox.net \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox