| 1 |
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 22:43:18 +0200 |
| 2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> The difference is in quality expectations. We did Python this way to |
| 5 |
> make sure things will work, and all obvious breakage will immediately |
| 6 |
> be caught. Your alternative does not provide for that. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Add a new Java version and recompiling packages with it, will also |
| 9 |
immediately show breakage if any. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
If your saying Python code is of higher quality than Java. I would |
| 12 |
digress heavily on that. You have leniency in python not being strong |
| 13 |
typed. Lack of generics and stuff could only mean that could be worse. |
| 14 |
Relying on internals to handle data types for you. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I found so many bugs in java-config when porting to C/Jem. Most were |
| 17 |
hidden due to how Python operates.... I never bothered filing bugs. I |
| 18 |
have mention of most all in my IRC logs. It was pretty considerable. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> > Anything in Gentoo that goes against the status quo gets heavy |
| 21 |
> > resistance and thus Gentoo does not change. But continues on with |
| 22 |
> > the status quo.... |
| 23 |
> > |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> You are talking *nonsense*. The python-r1 was *against* status quo. We |
| 26 |
> changed it. Now you want the old status quo back. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Regardless of new eclass, the TARGETS remain. Things did not change |
| 29 |
from a user perspective. Recently packaging some ebuilds, the |
| 30 |
COMPAT/VERSION does not seem to have changed. Despite what ever |
| 31 |
changes to the eclass. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives