| 1 |
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 10/14/2011 09:11 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 10/14/11 5:38 PM, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> I believe op's point is that there is no one to escalate the problem |
| 5 |
>>> to; certainly the council members are not going to do the work |
| 6 |
>>> themselves and we already have our best people on it. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> I'm aware of that. My point is that I think there are many scenarios in |
| 9 |
>> which EAPI-4 + python.eclass can work, especially if it's used only for |
| 10 |
>> few things in cases like www-client/chromium |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Because the python team takes _ages_ to do the transition that is |
| 13 |
>> holding back many other packages, because they've made python.eclass |
| 14 |
>> overly complex and now try to make it perfect, |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> I'd just like to get an "OK" to enable EAPI-4 for that eclass. |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> Please note that it's still up to dependent packages which EAPI they |
| 19 |
>> use. If they break python.eclass with EAPI-4 they shouldn't update to |
| 20 |
>> that EAPI. However, if there are packages using python.eclass that could |
| 21 |
>> work fine with EAPI-4, it shouldn't be blocking them for *ages* |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> That would be an ok approach from my perspective: We could just change |
| 25 |
> line 14 of python.eclass and let package maintainers report breakage as |
| 26 |
> they increment EAPI. I am confident that nothing EAPI <= 3 would break. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Is anyone (especially djc and the python herd members) opposed to this? |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Sorry I wasn't able to post before. But... |
| 33 |
This can be done and in fact has been discussed before, just allow |
| 34 |
ebuild to not die with EAPI=4, but this doesn do anything at all, just |
| 35 |
not die on EAPI=4. All the features and the good stuff just won't be |
| 36 |
there as other use cases need (as Robin and Tony mentioned). |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
We've been working on a redesign of the eclass but is nothing like |
| 39 |
stealing candy from a kid, there are many things involved, such as the |
| 40 |
large amount of Python ABIs that people use regularly, distutils |
| 41 |
quirks, current eclass complexity, among others that make it quite |
| 42 |
challenging to come up with something new. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
I'm all up for making eclass accept EAPI=4 ebuilds, but to fully |
| 45 |
implement EAPI=4 fesatures, I'm going to have to ask you guys for a |
| 46 |
bit of more patience. I know you have done just that, being patient, |
| 47 |
but just a bit more. I know we can deliver a solution for this soon |
| 48 |
enough. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Best regards, |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
-- |
| 53 |
Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek) |
| 54 |
Gentoo Developer |
Archives