1 |
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 3:05 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 22:16 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: |
4 |
> > I'd like to share my frustration at the state of Python in general, |
5 |
> > and Python packages in Gentoo. So I'd like to 'bootstrap' python3_8 -- |
6 |
> > that is, add it to the most common dependency, dev-python/setuptools. |
7 |
> > Simple thing, right? |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> |
10 |
> So I went with plan B instead: I'll do as much testing locally |
11 |
> as possible, and add py3.8 when I manage to get the tests on the package |
12 |
> in question working, independently of the testing of all deep test deps. |
13 |
> This will mean that some packages will have tests disabled temporarily |
14 |
> for end users. |
15 |
> |
16 |
|
17 |
Perhaps an overlay would be simpler just so that you can generally |
18 |
avoid worrying about QA until you're tidying up, but otherwise this |
19 |
seems like it could be done in-tree by just masking the use flag so |
20 |
that only those willing to test/contribute run into issues. |
21 |
|
22 |
You've described a number of issues and my sense is that many are just |
23 |
inherent to python itself (the complex dep graph/etc - unless we want |
24 |
a monolithic package). Some of course go to Gentoo practices, some of |
25 |
which cause pain outside of python. |
26 |
|
27 |
In particular it seems like many still don't understand when |
28 |
revbumping is necessary. I'd have to dig up the wording of the actual |
29 |
decision but as I recall when the Council made the decision they |
30 |
wanted to leave a bit of room for maintainer discretion, trusting that |
31 |
maintainers would use it properly. An alternative proposal was to |
32 |
just make a strict rule that would have erred on the side of QA, at |
33 |
the cost of extra rebuilds for users (but at least consistent ones |
34 |
that didn't break package managers). Obviously developers can't |
35 |
exercise proper discretion if they don't fully understand the impacts. |
36 |
If in doubt a revbump should always be safe, just at the cost of some |
37 |
rebuilds (which are probably cheap for python packages). |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
Rich |