From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11737 invoked by uid 1002); 6 Dec 2003 13:41:15 -0600 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-portage-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail Reply-To: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 12557 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2003 13:41:14 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 14:41:12 -0500 From: Jon Portnoy To: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Message-ID: <20031206194112.GA8713@cerberus.oppresses.us> References: <200312050158.17479.george@gentoo.org> <200312051326.47191.pauldv@gentoo.org> <200312051333.04801.george@gentoo.org> <200312061526.52187.pauldv@gentoo.org> <1070739311.6073.365.camel@ht.gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1070739311.6073.365.camel@ht.gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage-ng concurse entry Was: Updated Portage project page X-Archives-Salt: f646ebcc-5fac-4463-a366-2bbbd9a1f104 X-Archives-Hash: 6f5d1c27cf907edda01b219eaba1a12b On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 12:35:11PM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: > For backwards compatibility with existing ebuilds, yes we will probably > still need the metadata cache since we'll still have some kind of bash > linkage. It's important to point out that the design of portage-ng will > not be tied to ebuilds. Ebuilds will likely become "legacy" build > scripts that are superceded by something a lot better, cleaner, powerful > and also faster for portage-ng. > Please keep in mind that a significant number of users have expressed a fondness for ebuilds precisely because they can apply simple bash scripting knowledge to create a complex build script. Any new format should probably aim for similar syntax for precisely that reason. (But this is getting way ahead of things.) -- Jon Portnoy avenj/irc.freenode.net -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list