1 |
Dale posted on Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:13:48 -0500 as excerpted: |
2 |
|
3 |
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
4 |
>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:23:31 -0500 |
5 |
>> Dale<rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
6 |
>> |
7 |
>>>> It's being installed because it's a dependency of something you use. |
8 |
>>>> |
9 |
>>>> Replace Python with any other library and we wouldn't be having this |
10 |
>>>> discussion. |
11 |
>>>> |
12 |
>>> OK. Right now, as you type this, what package depends on python-3 and |
13 |
>>> won't work with python-2? Anything at all? If it is nothing, then |
14 |
>>> why install it? |
15 |
>>> |
16 |
>> And that's where you're making the mistake: you're treating Python as |
17 |
>> being different from every other package. |
18 |
>> |
19 |
>> In every other case, you want things to be using the newest version of |
20 |
>> a slotted package where possible. Why aren't you complaining that you |
21 |
>> were forced to install gcc 4.3 and 4.1 when 3.4 worked just fine? |
22 |
>> |
23 |
>> |
24 |
> Because, when I installed gcc 4.3, I could then unmerge the old gcc. |
25 |
> That's why I didn't complain about that. With python, we still have to |
26 |
> have the current version plus the new version which is not being used at |
27 |
> all. |
28 |
|
29 |
I had to pick somewhere to reply, and this seemed as good a place as any, |
30 |
as it does give me a jumping off point... |
31 |
|
32 |
It seems to me Ciaran is correct in one point, at least: python-3.x /is/ |
33 |
different than most such major updates (but then again, each such major |
34 |
update tends to have its unique points). That's why this huge discussion. |
35 |
|
36 |
It also seems to me that, due to the resolver and dependency specifier |
37 |
technology on the one side, the practicalities of running one's system |
38 |
with least complication (thus, most people /not/ wanting the normal update |
39 |
as soon as available/stable, in this /special/ case) on another, political |
40 |
correctness (the problem with just masking it in base and being done with |
41 |
it) on a third, and the number of packages to update to specific |
42 |
dependencies much like portage's, should that be chosen, on the fourth, |
43 |
we're pretty much surrounded with unpleasant alternatives that /are/ going |
44 |
to be something of an issue for /some/, no matter which is chosen. |
45 |
|
46 |
Again, thus the huge discussion. |
47 |
|
48 |
So what can be done besides continuing to spin wheels as we are? What's |
49 |
the least painful, yet still practical, alternative, all factors |
50 |
considered? |
51 |
|
52 |
Here's one that I'll admit isn't perfect, but none are. Yet this one |
53 |
seems the best way forward to me, given the alternatives. |
54 |
|
55 |
First, let's step back a moment and remember a defining characteristic of |
56 |
Gentoo, that we give the users both freedom and responsibility for their |
57 |
own systems, and have never made excuses for that fact. |
58 |
|
59 |
Second, let's remember that we /do/ have the news feature now, so at least |
60 |
there's a way to communicate a warning about such things. After that, |
61 |
it's generally up to the user, as, ultimately, it seems likely to be |
62 |
here. But we /can/ warn them using a news item, first, and given that, |
63 |
we /should/. |
64 |
|
65 |
So let's just recognize that it's not a perfect situation, create a news |
66 |
item saying that python-3 will soon (give a date) be unmasked, and suggest |
67 |
that users not needing it may wish to package.mask it themselves, with a |
68 |
link to documentation with specific instructions and a bit more detail on |
69 |
why they might wish to mask it and under what circumstances they might not. |
70 |
|
71 |
I'd suggest an unmasking date 30 days after the release of the news item. |
72 |
|
73 |
Yes, that's not going to get everyone before it happens, but the news item |
74 |
will be there after that for those what want to read it, and if people |
75 |
aren't doing that --ask or --pretend before they go doing their updates, |
76 |
especially if they're going a month or more between updates, well... |
77 |
Worst-case they get a py3k sitting there basically unused, and a few extra |
78 |
builds for some period, until such time as py3k is considered stable and |
79 |
popular enough to be the system default. |
80 |
|
81 |
This to me seems the best of painful choices. Down side, it's forcing |
82 |
every user to fiddle with their masks or decide not to. Three up sides: |
83 |
(1) At least with the news item they get some warning and can put the mask |
84 |
in place ahead of time. (2) We're simply relying on one of the best |
85 |
features of Gentoo, the one giving the user both the freedom and |
86 |
responsibility to manage his own system. (3) It gives us a way to |
87 |
actually move forward, /now/, using our current tools, without continuing |
88 |
the debate /forever/. |
89 |
|
90 |
Can anyone shoot holes in this any worse than the other proposals? Let's |
91 |
give our users the warning they need, and treat them like the adults |
92 |
Gentoo has always claimed to respect them as. What they do with it after |
93 |
that is up to them. |
94 |
|
95 |
-- |
96 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
97 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
98 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |