[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: "dselect" replacement team

> > I thought this was about user interfaces. Re-inventing the dependency code
> > seems to me a really extreme case of stupidity - and that's putting it
> > mildly.
> Maybe we should split the dselect effort into two groups: one group to
> design and implement a library with an simple elegant API to interface
> with the dpkg-libraries. This should start with a C-library and could
> later be extended with a C++-wrapper. The second group should work on
> the interface. Using this method it is possible to start with adapting
> the current dpkg-code to the new API. Changes (or new implementations) of
> the library code can then be used as drop-in replacements so no changes
> to the user interface is necessary.

This will be done at least somewhat within the current group.  I don't
want to make two groups though.  I want to keep this to as few people
as possible just to reduce the overhead of communicating with a large
number of people.  Communication time is proportional to the square
of the number of people.

                                 ( bcwhite@verisim.com )

 Two roads diverged in a wood, and I -- I took the one less travelled by,
 And that has made all the difference.  ("The Road Not Taken" -- Robert Frost)

Reply to: