Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:20:59 +0100 Patrick Lauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Tue, 2005-01-18 at 13:11 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 12:59:52 +0100 Patrick Lauer
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > | No, a version bump of vim-plugin-1.2.eclass to
| > | vim-plugin-1.3.eclass. So if you accidenally break something I can
| > | revert to 1.2 withou doing weird cvs-fu and overlay hacks.
| > | > Weird cvs-fu? Hardly... cvs log and cvs diff aren't exactly
| > difficult.
| For devs.
| What about broken stuff on the user side of things?
They file a bug.
why let it come to them file bugs about the system being dead, when we know we should do something to avoid it before it happens
| > No need to stick all sorts of weirdness into portage just because a | > few people are too lazy to read the cvs docs. Once you know how to | > use it, cvs is a lot simpler than trying to manually diff dozens of | > files. | Ok, but it still doesn't solve the problem of mutating eclasses.
No, that one's solved by versionator.
Really, I think you should put together a proper detailed list of what you think versioned eclasses would actually solve, so that I don't have to keep on discussing things with two different people who have very different ideas as to what the problem in question is...
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
