Paul de Vrieze wrote: [Thu Jun 01 2006, 02:44:39PM CDT] > I would like the council to discuss GLEP 49 as has been discussed on > the list some weeks ago. It is about the package manager requirements.
Incidentally, I drafted a competing GLEP that I posted to -dev (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) that was either overlooked in the rest of that thread or ignored because people considered it to be useless; I'm not sure which. In any event, I just want to bring it to the council's attention as an alternative approach. -g2boojum- -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76
GLEP: xx Title: Supporting alternative package managers Version: $Revision: 1.3 $ Last-Modified: $Date: 2005/11/13 17:16:50 $ Author: Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Status: Draft Type: Standards Track Content-Type: text/x-rst Created: 22-May-2006 Abstract ======== To support alternatives to the official package manager (portage, at the time of this writing), some sane ground rules need to be set. Specifically, no alternative ebuild-based package manager may be added to the tree unless it successfully works with all ebuilds supported by the official package manager. Moreover, no ebuilds may be added to the tree unless they are supported (without change) by the official package manager. Specification ============= * No alternative ebuild-based package manager may be added to the tree unless it successfully works with all ebuilds supported by the official package manager. If an alternative package manager is runtime incompatible with the official package manager, then it must be masked and provide appropriate warnings. * No ebuilds may be added to the tree unless they are supported (without change) by the official package manager. Rationale ========= The first rule sets a reasonable bar for adding an alternative package manager to the tree. Note that if an ebuild currently in the tree doesn't work with the official package manager, it isn't expected to work with an alternative package manager either. The second rule ensures that an alternative package manager cannot become a de-facto requirement by supporting packages that the official package manager cannot handle. In order to keep this proposal as simple and focused as possible, it has nothing to say about the process by which an alternative package manager might one day become the official package manager. It is assumed that sanity will reign, and no package manager will become official without being able to build installation media, providing a transition path from or to the existing official package manager, etcetera. Backwards Compatibility ======================= Pretty much the whole point, and it's explicit here. Copyright ========= This document has been placed in the public domain.
pgpZbopQvTPXT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
