| 1 |
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:54:13 +0200 |
| 2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 21:45:56 +0100 |
| 4 |
> Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 11:44:49 +0200 |
| 6 |
> > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> > > As some of you may have noticed, lately introduced 'double include |
| 8 |
> > > preventions' have caused changes in effective phase functions in a |
| 9 |
> > > few ebuilds. Also, often it is undesirable that change in inherits |
| 10 |
> > > of an eclass may cause an undesired change of exported functions. |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > The problem here is that eclasses aren't clearly split between |
| 13 |
> > "utility" and "does stuff", so people are inheriting "does stuff" |
| 14 |
> > eclasses to get utilities. The fix is to stop having stupidly huge |
| 15 |
> > complicated eclasses; changing inherit behaviour is just |
| 16 |
> > wallpapering over the gaping hole. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Soo, how do you propose to handle bug 422533 without changing inherit |
| 19 |
> behavior? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
We can't change inherit behaviour in EAPI 5 anyway since it's a global |
| 22 |
scope function, so I was planning to ignore it and hope that by the time |
| 23 |
EAPI 6 comes along, people will have learned not to write huge eclasses |
| 24 |
that do more than one thing. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives