On 11/1/05, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 02:10:03PM -0600, Kito wrote: > > I'll let Brian answer this, but I'm fairly certain there is no chance > > of this making it into the 2.0 series, 2.1 is dead, so 3.0 will have > > to be our saviour (boooo! hsssss! bad pun) > > No way in hell on 2.0; 2.1 was released dead (the major changes of it > are a year old), 3.0 would be the only _potential_ portage target. > > Why did I say potential? > > Cause I'm after making an ancillary point so everyone is on the same > page here- portage will *not* have any prefix support without the > ebuild changes being vetted by gentoo community.
I had to look up 'ancillary' and 'vet.' Vocabulary++. > What's being worked on is a prototype- the prototype will be useful on > it's own, but the main point of it is demonstrating that it's doable > and the pros/cons of it. > > Please keep this in mind. Bit of a reality check (kito and I are > operating under this)- comments of the sort "when portage supports > prefix "... > > Portage will only mainline support PREFIX if devs agree to the underlying > ebuild changes. So... help make it clean, but be aware of the rules being > operated under please. Very good to know, especieally as I was one of those assuming it was a "when" and not an "if." Do the 'rules being operated under' consist of what you mentioned above (i.e. prefixed installs are a one-off prototype unless/until everyone accepts it), or is there more to it than that? -- [email protected] mailing list
