Re: [gentoo-dev] Reverse use of Python/Ruby versions

[Michał Górny]

On pon, 2017-04-10 at 12:03 -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 08:37:34 +0200
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
> >
> > It is always nice when a person who:
>
> Starts off with insults and rudeness... Why I avoid you and I have
> requested MULITPLE times you just avoid me. Almost did not reply, but
> unlike your comments I will stick to FACTS.

I would love to avoid you. However, you make this impossible via trying
to make the life of Python team (which I am part of) a misery,
and Python support in Gentoo (which I use) a mess long-term. What is
even worse, you do that without even talking to the Python team, or even
bothering to CC them -- what you do instead is start a public discussion
about Python without even bothering to invite Python people to it.

>
> > a. did not bother to do any research on the topic (such as reading
> > previous posts or even asking the relevant teams),
>
> Research was done in the form of packaging some python applications.
> Also having worked with OTHER languages and teams on Gentoo. There are
> other ways of doing things. For those who are open minded to
> considering improvements.

FYI, if you want to change something, the first research you ought to do
is to ask 'why is it done this way?' Not jump to some random points that
might be completely irrelevant.

>
> > b. has barely any clue (if any at all) about Python ecosystem or
> > package maintenance in Gentoo,
>
> Again I have recently packaged some python libraries and applications.
> I personally maintain some 300+ Java ebuilds and others.
> https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/os-xtoo
>

Well, I've opened the first ebuild in your overlay [1] and it wouldn't
pass basic code review. For a start, it doesn't enforce USE dependencies
which are absolutely necessary for anything to work by omething else
than mere accident. It also explains why you are able to claim that your
solution works.

[1]:https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/os-xtoo/blob/master/dev-pytho
n/python-efl/python-efl-9999.ebuild

> I think I have a clue when it comes to package maintenance. I was doing
> it as a Developer back in 2006 thru 2008...
> https://github.com/wltjr?tab=overview&from=2006-12-01&to=2006-12-31

I'm sorry but 10 years ago is not very relevant to Gentoo today.

>
> > c. is either completely ignorant of how Python packages worked in the
> > past (which quite proves the points made above) or presumes that they
> > were changed for no reason by incompetent developers,
>
> I have seen it evolve ever since 3.x came out in 2008. The situation
> was never good and should have gone a different route from the start.
> Thankfully Java went a different route and other teams never shared the
> same approach. It is long over due to consider a better way.
>
> > decides that the workflow of Python team needs to be changed and goes
> > to discuss it on the mailing list with other people who barely do any
> > Python work.
>
> Because of how Python is handled on Gentoo. As a developer I would
> NEVER use python.  Just working with a few python libraries and apps,
> packaging them. Its a PITA compared to Java.
>
> If for no other reason than I have to go touch the ebuilds anytime a
> Python version is added or removed. Same for Ruby. That is dumb...
>
> There are some 1600 Python ebuilds. That is ALLOT of work to fiddle
> with adding/removing targets as new things come and go... Working with
> hundreds of ebuilds myself. I can easily understand the magnitude of
> such changes.
>
> Even my fully automated scripts, take considerable time to make minor
> changes across lots of ebuilds. If humans have to do this, it will take
> MUCH longer. Who wants to waste their time on such?
>
> Its funny. In the days of CI and CD, we must manually mess with
> targets.... There has to be a better way. If not what I am suggesting
> some other. I do not see any other solutions suggested. Just negativity,
> insults, and lack of any real facts just opinion and rudeness.
>
> Typical status quo...

The funny part is that you can write walls of text on yourself and your
ideas but find it impossible to put the most important question: *why is
it done like this?*

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny