[gentoo-alt] [PREFIX] removal of interrevisions

[Fabian Groffen]

Hi all,

I've just finished removing all few remaining interrevisions (-r0.XY)
ebuilds from the prefix tree.

In the next Portage release, interrevision support will be removed.

I believe we no longer need to modify ebuilds so often, and keeping this
feature is now a deviation from mainline which we better avoid.

Thanks,
Fabian

[Michael Haubenwallner]

Hi Fabian,

Post by Fabian Groffen
Hi all,
I've just finished removing all few remaining interrevisions (-r0.XY)
ebuilds from the prefix tree.
In the next Portage release, interrevision support will be removed.

Please don't!

Post by Fabian Groffen
I believe we no longer need to modify ebuilds so often, and keeping this
feature is now a deviation from mainline which we better avoid.

Although I've not managed yet to submit as GLEP or so, having interrevisions
is quite important to me - and for a meta distribution in general I believe.

In the end I really would like to see this being supported by mainline portage
at least, and probably PMS too. While Gentoo Linux as the mainline distribution
should not use interrevisions for their ebuilds, any derived distribution will
add need for one more level of revisions - much like we have done in Prefix!

In fact, I do derive a distribution from Prefix, and the only reason I can live
without another level of interrevisions for now is that I have commit rights to
the Prefix level of interrevisions.

Heck, even Gentoo's "-rX" already is nothing else than the first level of
interrevisions on top of the upstream releases, no?

So could we start (to think/discuss about) a route towards multiple interrevision
levels (with mainline support) instead, please?

Many thanks!
/haubi/

[Fabian Groffen]

Post by Michael Haubenwallner
Hi Fabian,

Post by Fabian Groffen
Hi all,
I've just finished removing all few remaining interrevisions (-r0.XY)
ebuilds from the prefix tree.
In the next Portage release, interrevision support will be removed.

Please don't!

Ok!

Post by Michael Haubenwallner

Post by Fabian Groffen
I believe we no longer need to modify ebuilds so often, and keeping this
feature is now a deviation from mainline which we better avoid.

Although I've not managed yet to submit as GLEP or so, having interrevisions
is quite important to me - and for a meta distribution in general I believe.

[snipping reasons as to why interrevisions are useful]

Would it be acceptable to "ban" the interrevisions from the prefix-tree,
but keep support in Prefix Portage?

Thanks,
Fabian

[Fabian Groffen]

FYI: I broke my own rule yesterday, so I guess we DO need interrevisions
afterall.

Fabian

Post by Fabian Groffen

Post by Michael Haubenwallner
Hi Fabian,

Post by Fabian Groffen
Hi all,
I've just finished removing all few remaining interrevisions (-r0.XY)
ebuilds from the prefix tree.
In the next Portage release, interrevision support will be removed.

Please don't!

Ok!

Post by Michael Haubenwallner

Post by Fabian Groffen
I believe we no longer need to modify ebuilds so often, and keeping this
feature is now a deviation from mainline which we better avoid.

Although I've not managed yet to submit as GLEP or so, having interrevisions
is quite important to me - and for a meta distribution in general I believe.

[snipping reasons as to why interrevisions are useful]
Would it be acceptable to "ban" the interrevisions from the prefix-tree,
but keep support in Prefix Portage?
Thanks,
Fabian
--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level