1 |
On 10/26/2014 12:31 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: |
2 |
> On 26/10/14 07:57, Zac Medico wrote: |
3 |
>> On 10/25/2014 01:32 PM, Zac Medico wrote: |
4 |
>>> On 10/25/2014 01:26 PM, Micha³ Górny wrote: |
5 |
>>>> Dnia 2014-10-25, o godz. 12:53:15 |
6 |
>>>> Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> napisa³(a): |
7 |
>>>>> |
8 |
>>>>> These functions are internals, so they need to be prefixed with __ like |
9 |
>>>>> __eqalog and __eqawarnlog. |
10 |
>>>> |
11 |
>>>> eqawarnlog shouldn't be internal since we support adding QA checks |
12 |
>>>> in repositories. In fact, I am planning to move some Gentoo-specific QA |
13 |
>>>> checks out of portage code. |
14 |
>>> |
15 |
>>> It's a PMS thing. If it's not in PMS and the package manager provides |
16 |
>>> it, it's supposed to be prefixed. |
17 |
>> |
18 |
>> Note that we could have unprefixed aliases inside misc-functions.sh, |
19 |
>> since misc-functions.sh env is never saved. |
20 |
>> |
21 |
> |
22 |
> I've sent updated patches based on the last feedback. Should I send a |
23 |
> new one with the aliases, and if so, should the portage checks use the |
24 |
> alias or real function? |
25 |
|
26 |
Considering Micha³'s plan to expose these functions to QA checks in |
27 |
repositories, it would make sense to go ahead and add expose the aliases |
28 |
in misc-functions.sh now. On the other hand, it makes sense to use the |
29 |
prefixed versions in all internal portage code, for consistency. So, I'd |
30 |
probably just wait until later to add the unprefixed versions. I don't |
31 |
have a strong opinion though. The new patch set that you posted looks |
32 |
good to me. |
33 |
|
34 |
> Just let me know what to change. I have no opinion what goes where. :-) |
35 |
-- |
36 |
Thanks, |
37 |
Zac |