On Tuesday 16 December 2003 22:36, Pieter Van den Abeele wrote:

> I would use 'knowledge base' instead of database, because it is a more
> generic term. A ports directory is not really a database as we know it
> (think SQL etc.). One of the benefits of formulating the core in
> prolog, would be to use a 'datalog' syntax, datalog is regarded as a
> universal query language. SQL can be expressed in datalog, just like it
> can be expressed in relational algebra/calculus.

Well, knowledge base makes me think of logic, so settings repository might be 
even a better word. It could however also be that I had too many encounters 
with logicians.
> each concrete architecture/platform can implement its own
> 'instal/uninstall' strategy.
>
> > Ebuilds wouldn't anymore be a shell scripts, but the build module will
> > offer all necessary commands to build something. Ebuild will simply be
> > a command sequence. Same goes for the install module.
>
> This makes eclasses overriding/adding some default behaviour or
> 'meta-data' somewhat more difficult to implement.
> I'd split ebuilds into two parts: the part detailing 'howto' and the
> part detailing 'about'.

My idea is basically that there is a structure with embedded shellscripts. 
This way we don't need bash for the metadata, only for actual unpacking, 
configuring, compiling and installing

>
> I certainly wouldn't exclude using a database (like in sql databases,
> etc.), but wouldn't exclude other possibilities too. If anyone wants to
> create one huge file containing all data in his own syntax, that should
> be possible because of the modular design.

Me neither, it should be an option however.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net