Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] python.eclass EAPI 4 support, this gets really annoying
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:54:57
Message-Id: 4E98E7B8.7000102@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] python.eclass EAPI 4 support, this gets really annoying by "Paweł Hajdan
1 On 10/14/2011 09:11 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
2 > On 10/14/11 5:38 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
3 >> I believe op's point is that there is no one to escalate the problem
4 >> to; certainly the council members are not going to do the work
5 >> themselves and we already have our best people on it.
6 >
7 > I'm aware of that. My point is that I think there are many scenarios in
8 > which EAPI-4 + python.eclass can work, especially if it's used only for
9 > few things in cases like www-client/chromium
10 >
11 > Because the python team takes _ages_ to do the transition that is
12 > holding back many other packages, because they've made python.eclass
13 > overly complex and now try to make it perfect,
14 >
15 > I'd just like to get an "OK" to enable EAPI-4 for that eclass.
16 >
17 > Please note that it's still up to dependent packages which EAPI they
18 > use. If they break python.eclass with EAPI-4 they shouldn't update to
19 > that EAPI. However, if there are packages using python.eclass that could
20 > work fine with EAPI-4, it shouldn't be blocking them for *ages*
21 >
22
23 That would be an ok approach from my perspective: We could just change
24 line 14 of python.eclass and let package maintainers report breakage as
25 they increment EAPI. I am confident that nothing EAPI <= 3 would break.
26
27 Is anyone (especially djc and the python herd members) opposed to this?

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies