Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
On 27.06.2011 19:00, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 17:53, Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@g.o> wrote:
>> I like the ruby approach for the reason that it doesn't require users to
>> run update scripts like python-updater.
>
> Sure, but if that means the developers now have to bump every package
> in the tree when a new version of Python comes out, I'm not sure
> that's the best trade-off.
>
And why can't this be handled by the eclass? If the ebuild is able to
specify it supports >=3.0 meaning it's expected that future versions
work then the eclass can make the new values available through IUSE when
new python versions are out and ebuilds don't require any changes.
Regards,
Petteri
|
|
