| 1 |
On 2019-09-05 06:02, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
>> In my case I am working on a new mysql eclass to outsource pkg_config |
| 3 |
>> function which is shared at least between dev-db/mysql and |
| 4 |
>> dev-db/percona-server (and maybe dev-db/mariadb). |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> For this new eclass I would say it's a "per-package" eclass and would |
| 7 |
>> probably have skipped mailing list review, too. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Everyone can skip as many paragraphs as they want, and then apply what's |
| 10 |
> said later to something said way earlier. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Could you please stop adding any bad interpretation? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
That was a serious question. For you, it's pretty clear. I am showing |
| 15 |
you, that for me, it isn't pretty clear. When you believe I skipped |
| 16 |
important lines in my quote please outline what I have missed and I will |
| 17 |
take the blame. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
>> If you want to make it clear, change "should" to "must" and maybe |
| 21 |
>> clarify per-package exception and limit to update case if you believe |
| 22 |
>> that really *all* *new* eclasses must be send to mailing list. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Submit a part. This is a community effort. Nitpicking and complaining |
| 25 |
> doesn't make things better. Fixing them does. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Sure, but at the moment *you* are the one who are saying it's a MUST. I |
| 28 |
don't understand it that way and I am fine with my understanding that |
| 29 |
per-package eclasses *should* but *must not* get reviewed through |
| 30 |
mailing list. In other words I am asking you to show us where it's |
| 31 |
written that *all* *new* eclasses *must* get reviewed through mailing |
| 32 |
list. I cannot find something like that in current devmanual (the link |
| 33 |
you showed). |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Maybe I am still missing something after reading |
| 36 |
https://devmanual.gentoo.org/eclass-writing/ 3 times... |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
In case I am not missing anything I suggested to improve devmanual in |
| 39 |
case you believe this should be a hard requirement. Because at the |
| 40 |
moment I don't believe it should be a hard requirement, *I* will not |
| 41 |
propose any changes. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
Regards, |
| 46 |
Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer |
| 47 |
C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5 |
Archives