Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Deprecation of python_version(), python_mod_exists(), python_tkinter_exists(), distutils_python_version() and distutils_python_tkinter() in EAPI <=2
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2010 21:38:02
Message-Id: 20100303153919.0f4744b4@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Deprecation of python_version(), python_mod_exists(), python_tkinter_exists(), distutils_python_version() and distutils_python_tkinter() in EAPI <=2 by "Petteri Räty"
1 On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 17:55:41 +0200
2 Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > On 03/03/2010 02:40 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
5
6 > > Is this actually documented anywhere? Or is this another of our
7 > > "this-is-policy-because-everyone-knows-it's-policy" policies? I know there
8 > > was a technical issue with removing pkg_*_rm functions way-back-when, but if
9 > > there's no technical reason why functions can't be deprecated, and we're just
10 > > clinging to policy in the name of policy, then I can't say I see the point.
11 > >
12 >
13 > Big eclass changes should go through gentoo-dev so someone here will
14 > point it out at least. Devmanual should document it so I challenge
15 > anyone to submit a patch:
16 >
17 > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/eclass-writing/index.html
18 > git+ssh://git.gentoo.org/var/gitroot/devmanual.git
19 >
20 > Also policies should be changed when they don't make sense any more as I
21 > said in my first response but I am not sure if that's the case here.
22
23 The problem is I don't think this is actually a policy. One of the first
24 projects I did as a developer, while still under probation, was a complete
25 rewrite, in-place, of an eclass. Many functions were removed or renamed
26 (done in an overlay of course, with a migration path). It was fully reviewed,
27 on list, by senior devs at the time. I was told by several people that if
28 there were any exported pkg_post_rm or pkg_pre_rm functions, they couldn't be
29 touched because of portage limitations (those limitations were removed ~3
30 years ago now IIRC). So I wonder if this isn't just a years-long game of
31 Telephone where one rule passed down by word of mouth got over-generalized
32 and sufficiently twisted as to apply to everything.
33
34 Nor do I think it's a particularly useful policy that keeps deprecated
35 interfaces around forever. Careful removal with a long warning period
36 shouldn't actually pose a problem. I think Arfrever's plan is reasonable.
37
38
39 --
40 fonts, by design, by neglect
41 gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect
42 wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies