| 1 |
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 14:33:50 -0700 |
| 2 |
Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On 12:46 Sun 07 Sep , Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: |
| 4 |
> > I personally agree with several others who have replied to this |
| 5 |
> > thread. The reduction in lines of code/characters seems to |
| 6 |
> > introduce an uglier syntax which is harder to read with |
| 7 |
> > questionable benefits. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> One of the great things about ebuilds is that they're very natural to |
| 10 |
> write in most cases, if you can manage to build the program by hand. |
| 11 |
> Raising this barrier of entry for questionable benefit seems like a |
| 12 |
> bad idea. We don't need to make it any harder to begin contributing |
| 13 |
> to Gentoo. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
So why are we making people know the exact ins and outs of |
| 16 |
reimplementing default functions, complete with knowledge of whether or |
| 17 |
not to use die, when all they need in most cases is to set a simple |
| 18 |
variable instead? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
What proportion of people do you think know whether or not you need a |
| 21 |
die with econf or emake? How many user-written ebuilds out there |
| 22 |
correctly install the right docs and don't try to install docs that |
| 23 |
don't exist, deal with install parallelisation correctly and handle |
| 24 |
error cases properly? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
The DEFAULT_* variables make it *easier* to write packages because half |
| 27 |
the time you don't need to arse around writing src_* functions. Every |
| 28 |
src_* function written by someone is another place there can be a |
| 29 |
non-obvious screwup. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives