| Summary: | repoman should cvs add files/ if it isn't already | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | Markus Nigbur (RETIRED) <pYrania> |
| Component: | Repoman | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
| Severity: | enhancement | CC: | pacho |
| Priority: | High | Keywords: | Inclusion |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
|
Description
Markus Nigbur (RETIRED)
2003-11-02 04:21:31 UTC
Putting a hold on feature requests for portage as they are drowning out the bugs. Most of these features should be available in the next major version of portage. But for the time being, they are just drowning out the major bugs and delaying the next version's progress. Any bugs that contain patches and any bugs for etc-update or dispatch-conf can be reopened. Sorry, I'm just not good enough with bugzilla. ;) I personally don't like this, repoman isn't here to do your work for you. However others may have different opinions on this, and it's not a difficult proposition. I'm not found of the idea either. There have been times when I've done my repoman --pretend scan in $PWD and thankfully repoman has let me know that I have files not added to the repo and those have been files I would not want added to the repo either. Don't see a problem with adding the files/ directory with FEATURES=autoaddcvs. This isn't about auto-adding any files in there as far as I underatnd it, and files/ is mandatory for package dirs anyway. Would there be a valid enough reason to automate this? For instance, we don't automate trivial problems like correcting the copyright header either... (In reply to comment #5) > Would there be a valid enough reason to automate this? I would prefer not to, for the same reason that tools like cvs and git don't add files automatically. |
