I moved the discussion on -dev since it should be the right place to
discuss this.
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 20:33:31 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 18:20:34 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
Live template provide correct ordering since genera
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:29:32 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
> > No it doesn't. _pre1, _pre2 etc does not accurately represent how
> > upstream do releases.
>
> upstream is an undefined entity. We knows already upstreams that
> follow a specific version numbering, that tag their release before
> time a
Hi Everyone,
This is a note that in the council meeting on 02/12/2009 the
function 'prepalldocs' is banned for use in ebuilds with EAPIs 0 1
and 2. If you want some functionality from this function, please
propose a new function or clearly defined behavior for prepalldocs
for a
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
No, but something can represent the most commonly used models. We can't
do -scm packages for upstreams that do utterly crazy stuff anyway, so
we'll stick to the reasonably sane ones.
So we stick to a subset we assume is what we'd expect from upstream.
Topic branches can
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:17:03 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > No, but something can represent the most commonly used models. We
> > can't do -scm packages for upstreams that do utterly crazy stuff
> > anyway, so we'll stick to the reasonably sane ones.
>
> So we stick to a s
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:17:03 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
No, but something can represent the most commonly used models. We
can't do -scm packages for upstreams that do utterly crazy stuff
anyway, so we'll stick to the reasonably sane ones.
So we sti
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:35:34 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
> > Hence -scm...
>
> that cannot do as well for more than a single target w/out using use
> flags.
Because it isn't supposed to. Versions and topics are not the same
thing, and treating topics as versions leads to mishandling.
> Then if yo
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:35:34 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
Hence -scm...
that cannot do as well for more than a single target w/out using use
flags.
Because it isn't supposed to. Versions and topics are not the same
thing, and treating topics as versions leads to mishandli
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 00:46:54 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
> master is just a name, you may have the main development happen in
> another branch (say devel) and the stabler tree is kept on the master
> branch and you may want to track both as well.
>
> Or even worse, you get two lines of developmen
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:53:51 +
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 00:46:54 +0100
> Luca Barbato wrote:
> > master is just a name, you may have the main development happen in
> > another branch (say devel) and the stabler tree is kept on the
> > master branch and you may want to tr
Ciaran McCreesh posted
20090213235351.381cf...@snowmobile, excerpted below, on Fri, 13 Feb 2009
23:53:51 +:
[>> > Luca Barbato wrote...]
>> >> Then if you continued to read you'll notice that
>> >
>> > ...you got so incoherent I gave up
>>
>> Relying to offense because I just pointed out
Ciaran McCreesh posted
2009021333.40efa...@snowmobile, excerpted below, on Fri, 13 Feb 2009
22:22:33 +:
>> > How do I track an upstream who has a 0.34 branch (which is equal to
>> > or ahead of the most recent 0.34.x release) a 0.36 branch (which is
>> > equal to or ahead of the most re
Ryan Hill posted
20090213191923.7fb35...@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca, excerpted below, on Fri, 13
Feb 2009 19:19:23 -0600:
> I'm sorry, Luca, but I can't do what I want to do with your proposal.
> With the -scm suffix I can.
Please, where's the concrete "Tell me how to do X with your proposal.
With
13 matches
Mail list logo
