1 |
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Erik Mackdanz <stasibear@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> writes: |
3 |
>> inherited eclasses. having a whitelist in place and die if eclass is not |
4 |
>> updated to handle it solves it. |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>> Thoughts? comments? cookies? threats? |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Wouldn't a blacklist be more practical than a whitelist? |
9 |
> |
10 |
> root# cat /usr/portage/profiles/eclass.eapi.mask |
11 |
> |
12 |
> fooutils.eclass >=6 |
13 |
> |
14 |
> The problem seems infrequent enough that a blacklist is sufficient, like |
15 |
> all the *.mask files in /usr/portage/profiles. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> The whitelist places a large testing burden on eclass authors on each |
18 |
> EAPI bump, where 99% of the time there won't be any issue to fix. |
19 |
|
20 |
A few things: |
21 |
|
22 |
1. Your syntax assumes that EAPIs are ordered (I'll let the |
23 |
mathematicians go on about set theory). Nothing about PMS requires |
24 |
this, the next one could be "2B," or "Fred," or "😁." (Apologies on |
25 |
the last one if it doesn't come through, as I have no idea how UTF-8 |
26 |
safe email actually is.) I don't think it is likely, but I know |
27 |
somebody else will point it out if I don't. |
28 |
2. I think that requiring eclasses to be reviewed before use on a new |
29 |
EAPI is a feature, and not a bug. It is a trivial update if it is |
30 |
fine, and depending on the nature of the eclass it might be trivial to |
31 |
determine if there will be a problem. If it isn't trivial to |
32 |
determine if there is a problem, it is probably even more important |
33 |
that it be reviewed. |
34 |
3. The whole problem driving this is people using EAPIs with eclasses |
35 |
without realizing they fail in subtle ways. If they're unmaintained, |
36 |
this is even more likely to happen, and all the more reason to expose |
37 |
the problem. It is better to expose problems during design than at |
38 |
runtime. |
39 |
4. EAPIs seem to come out about every other year right now. Is it |
40 |
really THAT hard to keep up with them? And eclasses which fall behind |
41 |
should probably be candidates for treecleaning anyway. |
42 |
|
43 |
-- |
44 |
Rich |