Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: dberkholz@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] new `usex` helper
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 17:29:58
Message-Id: CAAr7Pr9COV2LFS-81sMQWVMoM5NKXRZi=qxptyCgffYFkAgfMg@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] new `usex` helper by "Michał Górny"
1 On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 7:04 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
2 > On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 07:30:14 -0500
3 > Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote:
4 >
5 >> > Realistically I assume you're taking the stance "EAPI gets in the
6 >> > way, lets do away with it"- if so, well, out with it, and I'll
7 >> > dredge up the old logs/complaints that lead to EAPI.
8 >>
9 >> I see EAPI as a nice thing for standardizing features that are
10 >> implemented in the PM so they work identically across portage,
11 >> pkgcore, and paludis. But I don't think that implementing things in
12 >> the PM when they could go in an eclass is automatically the best
13 >> choice. It dramatically slows down the speed of iteration,
14 >> prototyping, and bug fixing.
15 >
16 > What is more important is that it takes the code further from devs.
17 > I like to see the code I use, and be able to do anything about it if
18 > necessary. Not to see a spec and three different implementation, of
19 > which two use random hacks which I can't do anything about unless I
20 > start to implement PM-specific anti-hacks in my code.
21
22 Just as an aside, every package mangler in Gentoo is open source. I
23 don't see why you can't 'see' the code it is using. Now you might say
24 'ahhh C++ makes my eyes bleed' (as an aside, go read versionator
25 eclass ;p) or 'eww portage is ugly' but every time I hear it I am less
26 convinced that it is a good excuse.
27
28 >
29 > --
30 > Best regards,
31 > Michał Górny
32 >