Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Ned Ludd
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 15:16 +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:51:31PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:41:43 +0200 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > | I then said that *you* say there can be legitimate reasons for them. > > | So why do

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:51:31PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:41:43 +0200 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | I then said that *you* say there can be legitimate reasons for them. > | So why do *I* have to come up with examples of it? > > Well that's just it.

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:41:43 +0200 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | I then said that *you* say there can be legitimate reasons for them. | So why do *I* have to come up with examples of it? Well that's just it. I didn't say there were legitimate reasons, I just didn't commit myself to sa

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 12:57:08PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:56:16 +0200 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | The devmanual states that they should not "generally" be added to the > | tree softmasked or unmasked. It does not state that they should never > | be

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Alec Warner
Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 02:24:24AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 11:14:45AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 0

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:56:16 +0200 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | The devmanual states that they should not "generally" be added to the | tree softmasked or unmasked. It does not state that they should never | be added as such at all. Or, in other words, there can be exceptions. It's n

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 02:24:24AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 11:14:45AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 0

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Brian Harring
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 11:14:45AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:45:50AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > > On Monday 05 June 2006 0

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:45:50AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > On Monday 05 June 2006 02:07, Harald van Dijk wrote: > > > > Some gnustep stuff inherits cvs, but

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Brian Harring
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:45:50AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Monday 05 June 2006 02:07, Harald van Dijk wrote: > > > Some gnustep stuff inherits cvs, but uses -D in the cvs options to > > > always download exactly the same t

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:45:50AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Monday 05 June 2006 02:07, Harald van Dijk wrote: > > Some gnustep stuff inherits cvs, but uses -D in the cvs options to > > always download exactly the same thing. > > then arent you just adding overhead to the poor gnustep cvs s

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Monday 05 June 2006 02:07, Harald van Dijk wrote: > Some gnustep stuff inherits cvs, but uses -D in the cvs options to > always download exactly the same thing. then arent you just adding overhead to the poor gnustep cvs servers ? why not roll a cvs snapshot tarball and distro via our mirrors

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-04 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 04:09:44PM -0400, Alec Warner wrote: > Slipping this in before 2.1 goes stable, it's a small check. > > Basically if your ebuild inherits a VCS eclass ( currently darcs, > subversion, cvs ) AND your ebuild has stable keywords on any arches > repoman will report an error.

[gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-04 Thread Alec Warner
Slipping this in before 2.1 goes stable, it's a small check. Basically if your ebuild inherits a VCS eclass ( currently darcs, subversion, cvs ) AND your ebuild has stable keywords on any arches repoman will report an error. One thing to note here: Are there any cases when one inherits a VCS