[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] New RESTRICT=live value for identification of live ebuilds?

[Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>]

Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org> posted 48957310.2050606@gentoo.org,
excerpted below, on  Sun, 03 Aug 2008 01:57:52 -0700:

> I don't like RESTRICT=tarballs because I don't think it's clear enough.
> I think we should go with RESTRICT="live-sources". Maybe it doesn't fit
> your convention, I'm pretty sure we already have other RESTRICT flags
> that don't fit your convention. How about "primaryuri", for example?

Well, it's obviously the sore thumb sticking out, but that doesn't mean 
we "otta" make it two sore thumbs! =8^)

In any case, just because I'm supporting what may be a compromise doesn't 
necessarily mean I support the convention one side was arguing, as the 
second-person "your" (whether singular or plural) would indicate.  I'm 
more or less neutral on that, personally, only supporting it here as a 
way to work with the people for whom it seems to be an issue.  
Personally, if it comes down to the "It's a list of flags, called 
'RESTRICT' only due to historical reasons" argument, so be it.

(Said as a user who contributed one live ebuild now in the tree, and uses 
a few others.)

-- 
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