-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2009.06.07 10:34, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Sun, 07 Jun 2009, Steven J Long wrote:
>
> > I'd just like to know what the implications would be for users if
> we
> > kept the .ebuild extension, and a new PMS were rolled out stating
> > that t
Patrick Lauer wrote:
And if you really absolutely have to do that you can change the sync
location on every disruptive change, but (imo) that should be
avoided.
If mirroring and other practical concerns weren't an issue what you're
essentially describing is just moving to a CVS/git/etc reposit
Richard Freeman posted 4a2baaa9.4030...@gentoo.org,
excerpted below, on Sun, 07 Jun 2009 07:55:21 -0400:
> As far as an upgrade path goes - we could provide a one-time tarball
> that will update portage (and its essential dependencies) to a version
> that can get users out of this bind. If a us
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Sun, 07 Jun 2009, Steven J Long wrote:
>
>> I'd just like to know what the implications would be for users if we
>> kept the .ebuild extension, and a new PMS were rolled out stating
>> that the mangler were allowed to fi
On Sunday 07 June 2009 11:34:12 Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Sun, 07 Jun 2009, Steven J Long wrote:
> >
> > I'd just like to know what the implications would be for users if we
> > kept the .ebuild extension, and a new PMS were rolled out stating
> > that the mangler were allowed to find the EA
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
Let's assume for the moment that we change from ".ebuild" to ".eb".
Then we obviously cannot change all ebuilds in the tree to ".eb",
otherwise old Portage versions would see an empty tree and there would
be no upgrade path.
Or am I missing something?
That is a good poin
> On Sun, 07 Jun 2009, Steven J Long wrote:
> I'd just like to know what the implications would be for users if we
> kept the .ebuild extension, and a new PMS were rolled out stating
> that the mangler were allowed to find the EAPI without sourcing (and
> giving the restrictions) once portage
Roy Bamford wrote:
> I've spent some time reading all of this years emails on GLEP55 and
> added a few lines to version 1.5 which is the last offical version.
>
Thanks for all the hard work.
My apologies for my mistaken comment at the end of the last Council meeting.
Clearly the mangler /does/ nee
