Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] new `usex` helper
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 05:35:35
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] new `usex` helper by Donnie Berkholz
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 21:02:28 -0500
Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote:
> On 17:56 Tue 13 Sep , Mike Frysinger wrote: > > useful enough for EAPI ? or should i just stick it into > > eutils.eclass ? OR BOTH !? > > I prefer to avoid EAPI whenever possible, as it just makes things > slower and more complex.
Sticking it in an EAPI *shouldn't* be slow and more complex. There are three reasons why it is, and they should all be within Gentoo's ability to solve. The first reason is that when we did what was then called EAPI 3, several Council members refused to put in more than one hour's work every month. To get an EAPI out quickly, we need Council members who are prepared to do a bit of homework, and to read proposals before a meeting and to comment on mailing lists rather than only bringing up questions (most of which have already been answered on the lists) at meetings. That shouldn't be too much to ask, and if it is, Council members should be prepared to delegate. The second is that it's impossible to get an accurate estimate from the Portage people for how long it will take to implement something. We were assured before the then-EAPI-3 proposals were submitted to the Council that all would be easy and quick to implement in Portage. We were told after approval that implementation would take a month, when it took a year to get just partial implementations of some features. This needs to be addressed -- to a certain extent we can drop features, but EAPI 4 currently has nasty problems (prefix flag needs to be in IUSE, and people are refusing to do that) due to one of two interdependent features being dropped (strict IUSE) without the standard wording for the other (use dependency defaults) being changed. The third is that there are a few people intent on preventing any new EAPI from ever happening. The solution here is to tell them that the decision has been made, that Gentoo is going to use EAPIs and a specification whether they like it or not, and that they can either help or keep quiet. No-one has the time to deal with a small group of individuals who pop up and yell "PMS sucks! EAPIs are bad! Portage is reality! Code to an implementation not a standard!" every time anyone asks for a new feature. None of this should be difficult. -- Ciaran McCreesh


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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] new `usex` helper Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>