On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 10:38:18 +0200 Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marius Mauch wrote: > > Ignoring possible semantic issues for the moment, > > Please point them so I could fix them properly ^^ For example all the ordering issues pointed out by others in this thread. Also the whole 'template' approach is likely going to introduce a number of issues. And as your proposal is lacking a lot of details more problems will come up over time. > > Which in turn either means that the PM has to internally support > > the SCMs or support some new phase functions to extract the > > revision. > > After some discussions with dev-zero, I think we'll need a new phase, > possibly trigged by maint, before I was thinking about adding it to > sync. What exactly do you mean with 'maint'? > > Plus it has similar (unstated) transition issues as GLEP-54, just > > avoids a new comparison algorithm and the CPV vs. atom issue. > > Hmm, give me more informations about your concern. Simply how would you actually introduce this stuff without breaking existing setups? Marius -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
