--- Begin Message ---
Actually, read through this article. It seems to indicate that the portage
system will not be running any quicker any time soon.
http://www.uwyn.com/resources/gentoo_departure.html
On Wednesday 30 July 2003 01:08, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On 07/29/03 Fred Van Andel wrote:
> > Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > (07/29/2003 15:08)
> >
> > >On 07/29/03 daniel wrote:
> > >> On July 29, 2003 04:48 pm, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > >> > The better way would be to rewrite portage with a modular
> > >
> > >approach,> > so it can use different backends (the current code is
> > >not very> > friendly for that). But that needs a lot of time.
> > >
> > >> alright then, i have some (not much, but some time). what
> > >
> > >languages> do i need to know? like i said earlier, i'm just a
> > >webgeek> (perl/php/mysql) but i'm willing to dive into python if it
> > >means> getting a more robust portage.
> > >
> > >No one is currently working on that and AFAIK there are no plans for
> > >a portage rewrite in the near future, so it's hard to say what
> > >languages will be needed for that. Most likely are C/C++ or Python,
> > >but that's just my opinion.
> >
> > Someone did write a db back end and posted it to bugzilla. Carpaski
> > was looking at it but I dont know if anything actually came from it.
> > I suggest you actually discuss this with carpaski before you attempt a
> > rewrite, you might just save yourself some grief.
>
> Sure, I'm not attempting to do any coding right now without any planning
> and discussing. This is only a long term idea for now.
>
> Marius
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
--
Henry Kleynhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- End Message ---
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
