From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: Sebastian Luther <SebastianLuther@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] layout.conf: What's our opinion?
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 22:27:00 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201401202227.01464.vapier@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52DD02FA.3040109@gmx.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1502 bytes --]
On Monday 20 January 2014 06:05:30 Sebastian Luther wrote:
> Currently layout.conf is not under PMS control. This basically means
> that every PM (or version thereof) may support different keys and assign
> different meanings to them. Portage's behavior for unknown keys in
> layout.conf is to ignore them without a warning.
which is correct
> The bad thing about this is that some layout.conf keys portage currently
> supports, may render the repository unusable for a PM if it doesn't
> support them.
i don't see that as a problem. alternative PMs can ignore unknown keys, or
they can implement support for the new keys, or the repo owner can avoid keys
that don't work across all the ones they want to support.
> To avoid this type of breakage in other areas (ebuilds, dependency
> resolution, ...) PMS has been created. Since the council demands PMS to
> be followed, I would expect that they also want the general idea "of not
> breaking things randomly" to be followed.
as you said, layout.conf isn't in PMS which means this rule does not apply.
> Basically it's either
> 1) "We add things as we see fit." or
> 2) "We should only add things if absolutely necessary.".
[1]. if you want things to be stricter, then you can lobby on the lists for
standardizing layout.conf in PMS.
that said, i don't think layout.conf is "open season". all user visible
additions should be reviewed with an eye towards "is this the best we can
reasonably do".
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-21 3:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-20 11:05 [gentoo-portage-dev] layout.conf: What's our opinion? Sebastian Luther
2014-01-20 11:43 ` Alexander Berntsen
2014-01-21 2:36 ` [gentoo-portage-dev] " W. Trevor King
2014-01-21 3:27 ` Mike Frysinger [this message]
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=201401202227.01464.vapier@gentoo.org \
--to=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=SebastianLuther@gmx.de \
--cc=gentoo-portage-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