David Golden wrote:
>Modules should only be listed once across all prerequisite categories.
Strongly opposed. It's possible for a single module to be required in
more than one phase, possibly for independent reasons and possibly with
different minimum versions. If the module must be listed only
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:48 PM, David Golden wrote:
> 14. Prerequisites should be mutually exclusive
-1
we have at least one case where runtime requires one version and tests
require different version
--
Best regards, Ruslan.
On Oct 9, 2009, at 6:55 AM, Graham Barr wrote:
Modules should only be listed once across all prerequisite
categories.
E.g. a 'requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'test_requires'; a
'configure_requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'build_requires'.
Instead, the spec should define which co
David Golden wrote:
14. Prerequisites should be mutually exclusive
* I think this would remove a certain amount of useful flexibility,
standard light weight "META Object" modules could easily automate the
production of the merged list. This feels like sacrificing on a
fundamental point t
On Oct 9, 2009, at 6:48 AM, David Golden wrote:
14. Prerequisites should be mutually exclusive
Proposal:
Modules should only be listed once across all prerequisite categories.
E.g. a 'requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'test_requires'; a
'configure_requires' module shouldn't be listed in '
* David Golden [2009-10-09T07:48:50]
> 14. Prerequisites should be mutually exclusive
No vote, no strong opinion.
--
rjbs
14. Prerequisites should be mutually exclusive
Proposal:
Modules should only be listed once across all prerequisite categories.
E.g. a 'requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'test_requires'; a
'configure_requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'build_requires'.
Instead, the spec should define w
7 matches
Mail list logo
