Skip to content

Conversation

tzz
Copy link
Contributor

@tzz tzz commented Apr 14, 2014

Proposed direct mechanism for calling package managers

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The prefix dpackage (presumably "direct package"), plural or otherwise, is unfortunately similar to dpkg (debian package), which initially confused me into thinking that this was Debian-specific. Perhaps directpkg ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it's OK, leaving until I get more feedback.

@tzz
Copy link
Contributor Author

tzz commented May 6, 2014

Fixed after comments. Thank you very much for the review.

@estenberg
Copy link
Contributor

What is the purpose of this one?
Will it serve the same purpose as e.g. pacakge_absent(), package_present() and friends?

@tzz
Copy link
Contributor Author

tzz commented Nov 7, 2014

It provides a similar interface to packages.cf but calls the native package managers. That's been the recommendation in many cases when the native packages promises don't work well. So it could be merged with packages.cf and enabled with a special class, or left as a standalone option...

@estenberg
Copy link
Contributor

OK; thanks.
I'd actually prefer having just 1 way of managing packages, perhaps @nickanderson has opinions.

@tzz
Copy link
Contributor Author

tzz commented Nov 7, 2014

Heh heh, there are at least two ways to manage packages on any Linux platform!

@cfengine-review-bot
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@tzz
Copy link
Contributor Author

tzz commented Jan 9, 2015

Looks like this one isn't happening... closing.

@tzz tzz closed this Jan 9, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants