On Tuesday 13 December 2005 11:11, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:51:51 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > | Without a list of future features, you think the best way to go must > | be the least agile? As Zac said, all that matters to keep full > | compatibility on the side of the readers is to add a level of > | indirection. All your reasoning above falls apart in the face of that > | simple *logical* request. > > Every problem can be solved by adding another layer of indirection, > except for the problem of having too many layers of indirection. This > layer you are proposing is not going to do anything useful. It's merely > adding indirection for the sake of it. There's no more need for this > than there is need for a two thousand line XML DTD which allows us to > specify the author's date of birth using an ancient Sumerian calendar. > > Come up with a full specification of how Portage will handle multiple > repositories, and get that specification agreed upon by the people who > will end up having to use it. *Then* come back and ask me to add in > more complexity. I'm not going to over-complicate things to deal with > random hypothetical half-baked speculation.
So what are you going to do? I asked already but you didn't answer. How are you going to find $PORTDIR/metadata/news? -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
