| 1 |
On 04/09/2017 08:58 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> I am NOT talking about stabilization at all. Simple reducing the burden |
| 4 |
> of adding targets to ebuild, and users having to fiddle with targets as |
| 5 |
> they come and go. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
You are: when you find out that a stable package doesn't work with the |
| 9 |
next version of python, you have to figure out who the maintainer of |
| 10 |
that package is, and file a bug. Then, whenever he decides to fix it, |
| 11 |
you have to wait 30 days and file a stabilization request. Wait another |
| 12 |
few months for that to go through, and repeat however many times to fix |
| 13 |
every broken package. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
You can either spend months/years doing that for all affected packages |
| 16 |
and every new version of python, or just commit the new version of |
| 17 |
python and let things break. Neither option is an improvement over the |
| 18 |
way things work now. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
We have it your way for PHP packages, and I wish it was like Python/Ruby |
| 21 |
instead. |
Archives