From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27147 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2004 16:25:30 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 20 Aug 2004 16:25:30 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ByCCj-0005fX-QF for arch-gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:25:28 +0000 Received: (qmail 2928 invoked by uid 89); 20 Aug 2004 16:25:24 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-releng-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail Reply-To: gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-releng@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 25802 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2004 16:25:23 +0000 From: John Davis Reply-To: john_davis@pauldavisautomation.com To: gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200408201041.07855.jhuebel@gentoo.org> References: <200408111331.30552.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <200408121836.12316.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <1093014598.31457.16.camel@woot.uberdavis.com> <200408201041.07855.jhuebel@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-X94Wrvf9uLVXegjvsoLA" Organization: Paul Davis Automation, Inc. Message-Id: <1093018838.31449.24.camel@woot.uberdavis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:20:38 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at mail.pauldavisautomation.com Subject: Re: [gentoo-releng] Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: 2004.0 Profile Deprecated X-Archives-Salt: 5a3515b3-6635-4251-a382-5434804099d2 X-Archives-Hash: c58b8697b04ce55326872ef264bb9ff4 --=-X94Wrvf9uLVXegjvsoLA Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 11:40, Jason Huebel wrote: > On Friday 20 August 2004 10:09 am, John Davis wrote: > > OK - > > I am going to try and make sense of all of the good discussion here by > > putting it into a draft proposal. From what I have gleaned off of the > > thread, this is the implementation that we are looking for regarding > > general profile policy: > > > > Profiles will adhere to the following layout standard: > > default-linux/$arch/20xx > > default-linux/$arch/20xx-r1 > > default-linux/$arch/20xx-r2 > > (and so forth) > > > > Each year, a new profile has to be created (20xx). Each subsequent majo= r > > revision to the 20xx profile will be marked as -rx, where x is the > > revision number. > > > > The top level arch directory (default-linux/$arch) will contain a > > ChangeLog that will serve as a record log for each profile revision and > > change. > > > > How does that sound? Am I missing anything? >=20 > Looks good to me. Quick (slightly OT) question: Is there any limit on t= he=20 > directory depth of a cascading profile? IIRC, there is not, but you would have to check w/ carpaski to be 100% sure. Cheers, --=20 John Davis Gentoo Linux Developer ---- GnuPG Public Key: Fingerprint: 4F9E 41F6 D072 5C1A 636C 2D46 B92C 4823 E281 41BB --=-X94Wrvf9uLVXegjvsoLA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBBJiTWuSxII+KBQbsRArHJAKCPwFga4Jk8gsSimrSub3tzpCsYbwCgvMFX 72a5SBQRCjboEI11acpdNKI= =UkYa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-X94Wrvf9uLVXegjvsoLA--