From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E3eaJ-00078D-Hg for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 18:48:51 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7CImIQP007599; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 18:48:18 GMT Received: from egr.msu.edu (jeeves.egr.msu.edu [35.9.37.127]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7CImGTk002236 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 18:48:17 GMT Received: from [35.9.44.33] (caffeine [35.9.44.33]) (authenticated bits=0) by egr.msu.edu (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7CImD3O004592 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 12 Aug 2005 14:48:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <42FCEEF2.5090603@egr.msu.edu> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 14:48:18 -0400 From: warnera6 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org CC: Christopher Korn Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Next major version References: <1123700491.29247.56.camel@localhost> <42FA540E.2080900@egr.msu.edu> <20050811195149.4957adf5.chris@chkorn.de> <42FB96CE.6090906@egr.msu.edu> <1123862674.23755.44.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1123862674.23755.44.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: cbfb7c15-23a0-4f3d-b774-d1b9fe58a904 X-Archives-Hash: 46b2fe21067807e996225fc604dd6628 Kristian Benoit wrote: > On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 14:19 -0400, Alec Warner wrote: > >>Christopher Korn wrote: >> >> >>>>>Hi Jason and other folks, >>>>>I saw your last comment on >>>>>http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73350 about most the these >>>>>feature to be present in the next major version. That is really >>>>>great to read. >>>>> >>>>>On that subject, I'd like to have an idea about when we should >>>>>expect that next version. >>>>> >>>>>That said, I think it would be helpful to have a portage developper >>>>>site. Perhaps there is and I dont know... >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> That would require someone writing one, so if you are >>>>volunteering ;) >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>Writing is not the problem. But without (proper) information it is hard >>>to write a documentation or something like this. >>> >>> >>>Chris >>> >>> >> >>I had a wiki that attempted to cover portage-2.0 api documentation as >>well as anything written for 2.1 but lost much of the work in a >>transition from windows to linux ( I screwed up the SQl backups :) ). >>I thought about putting something up on the devwiki but I haven't >>proposed anything because no one really likes a wiki for API docs. >> >>As for API docs, there are none at present; and there are no plans for >>any stable docs, IIRC. >> >>As for a developer website, what kinds of information are you looking for? > > > Like you talked about, doc would be nice, Jason has some doc, api doc... > here: > http://dev.gentoo.org/~jstubbs/ > but it does not look and is not official. > > I remember, when I started using Gentoo, reading that portage is a stand > alone tool, it is not bind into Gentoo in anyway, someone could use it > on redhat, debian, lfs... > > Back then I was using lfs so I thought portage could be the way to go on > lfs, but I realized that Gentoo fit my needs and I did'nt have to > compile everything by hand anymore and still have everything compiled by > my machines :) OH JOY !!! > > But 5 years or so later, the only official place to get portage releases > is still in the gentoo mirrors. There is no RSS feed or anything like > that. I still believe that portage has the potential to be so powerful > that redhat, debian, ... could be building their packages using portage, > managing their own tree, having night build. > > The problem is see, is that the initial portage vision (or perhaps my > initial vision, a vision I still have) has not been carried along with > it's developpement. "portage-ng", as it were? IMHO portage is a far cry from what is needed for any kind of intense platform development. I'm not going to harp on it's problems; everyone already knows what they are and we have people who are dedicated to working on it. No one has seen the code from portage-ng, so it was abandoned. The goals set for 2.1 and beyond seem lofty, and integrating portage into a non-gentoo environment is tricky at best, even with a nicely rewritten API. I don't see why other distributions would turn to our tools when theirs work perfectly fine in 90% of cases. However, if they end up benefitting, more power to them. Thats why we are all here, is it not? > > Having an official web site, doc, ... will help getting visibility and > effort from the rest of the world thus we'll have better tools and > eventually extend portage beyond Gentoo. > > Kristian > -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list