| 1 |
On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 23:03:53 +0200 |
| 2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 22:27 +0200, Ralph Seichter wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Hi folks, |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > imagine a Python application "monty" with the following requirements |
| 8 |
> > listed in setup.py: |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > install_requires=[ |
| 11 |
> > 'ham>=1.0', |
| 12 |
> > 'spam>=2.0', |
| 13 |
> > 'eggs>=1.5' |
| 14 |
> > ] |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > If I want to add "monty" as a new Gentoo package, and if none of |
| 17 |
> > "ham", "spam" and "eggs" are so far available as Gentoo packages, |
| 18 |
> > what is the recommended way of handling this situation? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> I presume you want to proxy-maintain all of those packages. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> > |
| 23 |
> > 1. Create one pull request that contains separate commits for adding |
| 24 |
> > each of the four Python packages? |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> This one. We generally find it easier when we see the big picture |
| 27 |
> in one place. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> By the way, there's gentoo-proxy-maint@ ml for this kind of questions. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Also, it is best to state that these new pkgs are a depencency of |
| 34 |
"monty" in their commit messages. It can be clearer as to why these |
| 35 |
are in the tree if "monty" drops them as a dependency later and there |
| 36 |
are no other reverse deps for them in the tree. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
ie: app-foo/ham: New pkg, depencency of app-foo/monty-1.2.3 |
Archives